Raw image barrel distortion

[ronecc]

I have just started using X7, after spending quite a few years using X2.
I opened a RAW image photo of a cabinet. The image had a very bad barrel distortion. I then opened a jpeg of the same image and that was okay. I had previously opened the same photo in Adobe Photoshop and it had perfect straight edges. Any ideas why X7 should do this?

[JoeB]

I have just started using X7, after spending quite a few years using X2.
I opened a RAW image photo of a cabinet. The image had a very bad barrel distortion. I then opened a jpeg of the same image and that was okay. I had previously opened the same photo in Adobe Photoshop and it had perfect straight edges. Any ideas why X7 should do this?

You will likely get a better answer from others who use various programs to process RAW images. However, I read somewhere in my PSPX7 researching that some cameras have an inherent lens distortion showing in RAW images that aren't corrected in-camera because they'll likely be corrected anyway in whatever software program the user plans to use to process RAW. Your camera could be one of those but I wouldn't know - others who are more experienced in camera brands and RAW would be better able to discuss that. In any event, RAW processing in ADJUST mode in PSP does not automatically correct for lens distortion, so you see what's there. I suspect that Photoshop DOES automatically correct for lens distortion which would explain why the image looks good in that program.

[ronecc]

Thanks for your reply JoeB. That could explain the problem.

[JoeB]

Thanks for your reply JoeB. That could explain the problem.

As an aside, my reading of this forum and other online resources would indicate that, while PSP X7 has many excellent tools that rival competitors, RAW processing is not where it excels. I believe many PSP users tend to use a third party dedicated RAW program for RAW conversion before doing more advanced editing in PSP.

[hartpaul]

That only makes sense as well , use a specialist program to get the best out of your Raw files. That's part of the reason for ASP and Lightroom. Others have pointed out that Photoshop's raw converter is similar / same as the conversion process in lightroom and so does an equivalent job. If so then one would not need anything else except Photoshop, so Adobe have placed enough extras in Lightroom that people still want to buy it. Corel however have just added a basic raw converter to PSP which in my case is not needed as I use DPP for basic converting of raw files.

[ronecc]

Again thanks. I have not really delved into Raw up until now. Perhaps I should try a dedicated program. I do prefer PSP for easy editing over APS. X7 is a touch more involved than the X2 I am used to, but that maybe down to Corel trying to make it more complicated looking. I will see how I go on with it before I ditch itch it and go back to X2.

[hartpaul]

I still use X2 for the bulk of my processing because of its streamlined working . X3 was a big change in the interface as were the later versions which I use for text processing as I do not like the text processing in X2.
Later versions also have some improved features that you may find useful. However because you can have more than one version at once and even running at the same time, PSP has a greater versatility than many other programs. This means you can continue to use the earlier program til you are fully used to the latest versions.

[GlenBarrington]

That only makes sense as well , use a specialist program to get the best out of your Raw files. That's part of the reason for ASP and Lightroom. Others have pointed out that Photoshop's raw converter is similar / same as the conversion process in lightroom and so does an equivalent job. If so then one would not need anything else except Photoshop, so Adobe have placed enough extras in Lightroom that people still want to buy it. Corel however have just added a basic raw converter to PSP which in my case is not needed as I use DPP for basic converting of raw files.

Actually, I don't think PSP is all that bad. That being said, I still use ACDSee (Now Ultimate 8 ) for raw conversions, I'm used to it, and frankly ACDSee, the company, is showing the sort of aggressive inventiveness that we all sort of expected Corel to show when Adobe announced their subscription model.

However I was curious as to WHY PSP has such a bad reputation as a raw processor, and worked with it quite a bit, trying to figure out how to get the best out of it. I came to the conclusion that for the casual raw shooter or the beginner who doesn't want to spend any additional money investigating the raw possibilities, it is a viable option.

I even wrote an article on my blog about it. It's a little dated since it was written for X6. But I don't think anyone who uses CRL (Camera Raw Lab) should feel like a 2nd class citizen. You can do very good work with it, IF you are willing to understand and work within its limitations.

http://glenbarrington.blogspot.com/2014 ... s-why.html