What camera settings in RAW?

[MichaelC]

First time poster so hi to everyone.

I have a question about the different camera settings that can be set from the menu when shooting in RAW and if they have any effect on the file coming out of camera. For example I know that setting sRGB or Adobe RGB make no difference to the file (in RAW), however, what about the "Picture Style" or "Highlight Tone Priority", "Long Exposure Noise Reduction" settings etc. (these are settings for a Canon). Do these make a difference to the file by changing it in camera or as in sRGB/RGB they make no difference as all the info is embedded in the file with the same adjustments available to be replicated in Lightroom from the RAW file? Are they really only beneficial for jpegs?

Hope this makes sense!

[Donald]

First time poster so hi to everyone.

I have a question about the different camera settings that can be set from the menu when shooting in RAW and if they have any effect on the file coming out of camera. For example I know that setting sRGB or Adobe RGB make no difference to the file (in RAW), however, what about the "Picture Style" or "Highlight Tone Priority", "Long Exposure Noise Reduction" settings etc. (these are settings for a Canon). Do these make a difference to the file by changing it in camera or as in sRGB/RGB they make no difference as all the info is embedded in the file with the same adjustments available to be replicated in Lightroom from the RAW file? Are they really only beneficial for jpegs?

Hope this makes sense!

Michael

First of all, a very warm welcome to CiC. Delighted that you've decided to join us here in this little corner of cyberspace. I hope you enjoy the forum and will be around for a while.

Long Exposure Noise Reduction (LENR) is one of the very, very few (only?) setting in the camera that impacts on raw files as well as jpegs. Things like picture style don't have any impact on a raw file.

On the question of using LENR, I think you'll find most people now saying and writing - Don't use it. The post-processing tools now available will, it is argued, do a much better job of dealing with noise than LENR in-camera.

Now stand back and wait for the posts of folks who don't agree with me!!

[James G]

Michael, I'd agree with Donald that the settings you mention have no impact on how the raw image is captured. As such, you could discount them.

I would suggest though that if you are 'new' to photography, you still check out what they do. My reason?

Well, until you become comfortable with your camera, many of these settings e.g. Picture Style, Highlight Tone Priority affect the way you see the image 'in camera' at the time of shooting. In particular, the Histogram will be an expression of the way those settings would be applied if you are shooting Jpeg.

So, it is worth studying your manual, and understanding what they do.

If however, you are a 'seasoned' raw shooter, they have no real relevance to your captures.

One thing though, that I do, is to ensure that a neutral Picture style is activated. This is not because I pay much attention to the jpeg representation, but by ensuring that Highlight Tone priority is switched of, and that no sharpening, neutral contrast with no changes to colour saturation are applied, ensures that the histogram is the best it can be when assessing the raw capture.

[Donald]

Excellent points, James.

[Mike Buckley]

On a somewhat related subject, I keep my in-camera sharpening setting very high. Doing so makes it easy for me to evaluate the quality of focus when viewing parts of the magnified image in the camera's LCD. With the sharpening value set so high, if the image isn't sharp in the LCD I know it won't ever be sharp after I post-process it. My first post-processing step is to eliminate the in-camera sharpening, mostly because it is always applied to the entire image when I might want sharpening to be applied only to some parts of it. I also might want to apply sharpening to a lesser degree where I do apply it.

[James G]

With the sharpening value set so high, if the image isn't sharp in the LCD I know it won't ever be sharp after I post-process it.

Good point Mike, I shoot with a Canon 7DMk2. I can zoom-in on the captured image, but since I'm shooting live subjects mostly at the present, if it isn't sharp enough at time of capture I don't get a second chance

I'll keep your tip in mind for static panorama shoots though!

[thetraveler]

Mike,
I know you didn't ask this but I will act as if you asked, "How important is technical perfection to photography?"

In my opinion, photography is about taking interesting, even important images, trying to create, to make art. Too many people see photography as a maze of technical issues, the mastery of which is supremely important. That way, if they master all those technical issues, they will be a good photographer.

Photography is like fly fishing. You must learn a great many facts about rods, lines, flies, etc. Then you must learn the skills of the different casts. Then you get to the river's edge and you realize that all that technical stuff and skills is only in service to the idea of fishing.

Same with photography. All that technical knowledge and skills are subordinate to the idea of making good pictures. Technically excellent pictures of intensely boring content are a failure. Good images with some technical inadequacies are good images. See great images and the technical issues are irrelevant, invisible - as so they should be.

My goal is to produce good pictures where the technical issues disappear as the viewer looks through the frame and into the world I've framed for him or her. Everything else is unimportant.

This below is one of my best images, I think, taken from a moving train on a dusty, misty morning. Do you care about lens, f stop, shutter speed, iso - any of that? No, you look at the image, pass into the frame and ignore everything else (I hope).

Always think of photography as creating art and all the knowledge and skills as just the tools not the end point.

[Mike Buckley]

since I'm shooting live subjects mostly at the present, if it isn't sharp enough at time of capture I don't get a second chance

You won't get a second chance in many situations of the same subject in the same circumstance but you'll get a second chance at different subjects in similar circumstances. As an example, if you check for sharpness of people walking parallel to the focal plane and determine that you need to use a faster shutter speed to stop their action, you can change that setting to get a better photo the next time you release the shutter.

[Mike Buckley]

Always think of photography as creating art

Never say never. Similarly, never say always. Photography isn't only about creating art. Actually, my guess is that no more than 1% of photography is about creating art.

[thetraveler]

Never say never. Similarly, never say always. Photography isn't only about creating art. Actually, my guess is that no more than 1% of photography is about creating art.

I encourage people to think about creating.
Not creating means copying.

I try to create art.
You can do what you like.

[Didace]

I encourage people to think about creating.
Not creating means copying.

So people that are just trying to document their life - a trip, a party, or maybe a special occasion - to preserve a picture of their memories are just copying? Seems a bit harsh.

[mikesan]

On a somewhat related subject, I keep my in-camera sharpening setting very high. ..... My first post-processing step is to eliminate the in-camera sharpening, mostly because it is always applied to the entire image when I might want sharpening to be applied only to some parts of it. I also might want to apply sharpening to a lesser degree where I do apply it.

I am a bit confused by this statement. It seems to imply that in-camera sharpening does affect the RAW image, and you eliminate this effect when processing the RAW image. I was under the impression that in-camera sharpening (like the other in-camera settings, about which the OP enquired) affects only the jpeg image, but not the RAW file.

[Black Pearl]

I am a bit confused by this statement. It seems to imply that in-camera sharpening does affect the RAW image, and you eliminate this effect when processing the RAW image. I was under the impression that in-camera sharpening (like the other in-camera settings, about which the OP enquired) affects only the jpeg image, but not the RAW file.

It will depend on the raw conversion software used - some will read various bits of the file data and apply them to the raw as its first opened - manufacturers software tends to read all the in-camera settings. Obviously they're not set in stone like a jpeg and you can alter them....hence Mike's statement that he removes the sharpening upon import.

[Donald]

Just to reinforce Robin's point.

If, for example, like Michael, you are using Canon and you use Canon's own Raw Processor (Digital Photo Professional - DPP), then it will apply all the camera settings to the RAW file. For example, I can set images to be 1:1 (square) ration in my 5DS. If I used DPP on that, it would show it to me as a square image, even thought here is information on the rest of the sensor that I can change back to.

But, as Robin says, because it's a RAW file, you can just undo them and substitute your own when you're processing. With a JPEG the settings are embedded and you're stuck with them.

[Mike Buckley]

Great question, Mike!

To be as precise as I know how to be, all in-camera settings affect the raw file but only to the extent that all in-camera settings are permanently embedded in it. Depending on the raw converter that you use and how you decide to use it, the converter will completely ignore those settings, emulate them or use them. I use Nikon software to convert my Nikon raw files, so they are automatically converted using the in-camera settings. (Non-Nikon converters can only ignore them or emulate them because the in-camera settings are proprietary to Nikon.) Once the raw file is converted, I then decide which in-camera settings to retain and which settings to change as I post-process the file. I always change the sharpening setting.

At any time during the life of the file, I will always have the option of using the Nikon converter to read the in-camera settings or the settings I have changed.

EDIT: I see that Donald and Robin have already provided helpful posts while I was writing mine.

[Mike Buckley]

With a JPEG the settings are embedded and you're stuck with them.

To clarify that, with a raw file the settings are also embedded but you're not stuck with using them if you prefer other settings.

[Donald]

To clarify that, with a raw file the settings are also embedded but you're not stuck with using them if you prefer other settings.

Thanks, Mike. That is the correct way to express it.

[thetraveler]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that edits made when 'editing' the raw file, or rather editing the viewable file that the raw translator shows actually don't change the raw file but are generally carried along as a 'sidecar' file. With LR or Adobe Camera Raw the sidecar has the same name as the image file but a suffix of xmp.

The xmp file is merely a list, in standard text, of the changes to be applied to the raw file when it is opened the next time.

If you look at a folder with several raw files, you will note that they are of different sizes according to numbers of changes made. Each time you open the raw file, you are opening the same raw file and the look is different according to the changes recorded in the xmp and applied to the raw file when it is opened.

x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c011 79.156380, 2014/05/21-23:38:37 ">
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
<rdfescription rdf:about=""
xmlns:tiff="http://ns.adobe.com/tiff/1.0/"
xmlns:exif="http://ns.adobe.com/exif/1.0/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:xmp="http://ns.adobe.com/xap/1.0/"
xmlns:aux="http://ns.adobe.com/exif/1.0/aux/"
xmlnshotoshop="http://ns.adobe.com/photoshop/1.0/"
xmlns:xmpMM="http://ns.adobe.com/xap/1.0/mm/"
xmlns:stEvt="http://ns.adobe.com/xap/1.0/sType/ResourceEvent#"
xmlns:xmpRights="http://ns.adobe.com/xap/1.0/rights/"
xmlns:Iptc4xmpCore="http://iptc.org/std/Iptc4xmpCore/1.0/xmlns/"
xmlns:lr="http://ns.adobe.com/lightroom/1.0/"
xmlns:crs="http://ns.adobe.com/camera-raw-settings/1.0/"
tiff:Make="OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP."
tiff:Model="E-M5"
tiff:Orientation="1"
tiff:ImageWidth="4608"
tiff:ImageLength="3456"
exif:ExifVersion="0230"
exif:ExposureTime="1/160"
exif:ShutterSpeedValue="7321928/1000000"
exif:FNumber="5/1"
exif:ApertureValue="4643856/1000000"
exif:ExposureProgram="3"
exif:SensitivityType="1"
exif:ExposureBiasValue="0/10"
exif:MaxApertureValue="392/256"
exif:MeteringMode="2"
exif:LightSource="255"
exif:FocalLength="20/1"
exif:FileSource="3"
exif:FocalLengthIn35mmFilm="40"
exif:CustomRendered="0"
exif:ExposureMode="0"
exif:WhiteBalance="1"
exif:SceneCaptureType="0"
exif:GainControl="2"
exif:Contrast="0"
exif:Saturation="0"
exif:Sharpness="1"
exifigitalZoomRatio="100/100"
exif:FocalPlaneXResolution="87196351/32768"
exif:FocalPlaneYResolution="87196351/32768"
exif:FocalPlaneResolutionUnit="3"
exifateTimeOriginal="2016-01-31T14:00:52"
exif:PixelXDimension="4608"
exif:PixelYDimension="3456"
dc:format="image/x-olympus-raw"
xmp:CreatorTool="Version 2.0"
xmp:ModifyDate="2016-01-31T14:00:52"
xmp:CreateDate="2016-01-31T14:00:52"
xmp:MetadataDate="2016-01-31T15:15:22-05:00"
aux:SerialNumber="BEJ514777"
aux:LensInfo="20/1 20/1 17/10 17/10"
aux:Lens="LUMIX G 20/F1.7"
aux:LensSerialNumber="01DG3181573"
aux:ApproximateFocusDistance="98/100"
aux:FlashCompensation="0/256"
photoshopateCreated="2016-01-31T14:00:52"
photoshop:SidecarForExtension="ORF"
photoshop:EmbeddedXMPDigest="000000000000000000000 00000000000"
xmpMMocumentID="5CE9817E5AD295854A21134BD49CCD0A"
xmpMM:OriginalDocumentID="5CE9817E5AD295854A21134B D49CCD0A"
xmpMM:InstanceID="xmp.iid:26aa4607-8435-fa47-90b7-eeac4060958a"
xmpRights:Marked="True"
xmpRights:WebStatement="lewlortonphoto.com"
crs:RawFileName="HoCoArts_-1310007.ORF">
<exif:ISOSpeedRatings>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li>1250</rdf:li>
</rdf:Seq>
</exif:ISOSpeedRatings>
<exif:Flash
exif:Fired="False"
exif:Return="0"
exif:Mode="1"
exif:Function="False"
exif:RedEyeMode="False"/>
<exif:UserComment>
<rdf:Alt>
<rdf:li xml:lang="x-repair">Lewis Lorton</rdf:li>
</rdf:Alt>
</exif:UserComment>
<dc:creator>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li>Lewis Lorton</rdf:li>
</rdf:Seq>
</dc:creator>
<dc:rights>
<rdf:Alt>
<rdf:li xml:lang="x-default">Copyright 2015 LewLortonPhoto.com</rdf:li>
</rdf:Alt>
</dc:rights>
<dc:subject>
<rdf:Bag>
<rdf:li>1dd- things</rdf:li>
<rdf:li>hocoarts</rdf:li>
<rdf:li>review</rdf:li>
</rdf:Bag>
</dc:subject>
<dc:description>
<rdf:Alt>
<rdf:li xml:lang="x-default">OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA</rdf:li>
</rdf:Alt>
</dc:description>
<xmpMM:History>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li
stEvt:action="saved"
stEvt:instanceID="xmp.iid:26aa4607-8435-fa47-90b7-eeac4060958a"
stEvt:when="2016-01-31T15:15:22-05:00"
stEvt:softwareAgent="Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows)"
stEvt:changed="/metadata"/>
</rdf:Seq>
</xmpMM:History>
<xmpRights:UsageTerms>
<rdf:Alt>
<rdf:li xml:lang="x-default">all right reserved</rdf:li>
</rdf:Alt>
</xmpRights:UsageTerms>
<Iptc4xmpCore:CreatorContactInfo
Iptc4xmpCore:CiAdrPcode="21046"
Iptc4xmpCore:CiEmailWork="lew@lewlortonphoto.com"
Iptc4xmpCore:CiTelWork="410-997-2806"
Iptc4xmpCore:CiAdrRegion="MD"
Iptc4xmpCore:CiAdrCtry="USA"
Iptc4xmpCore:CiAdrExtadr="10096 Hatbrim Terrace"
Iptc4xmpCore:CiAdrCity="Columbia"
Iptc4xmpCore:CiUrlWork="lewlortonphoto.com"/>
<lr:hierarchicalSubject>
<rdf:Bag>
<rdf:li>1dd- things|hocoarts</rdf:li>
<rdf:li>1dd- things|review</rdf:li>
</rdf:Bag>
</lr:hierarchicalSubject>
</rdfescription>
</rdf:RDF>
</x:xmpmeta>

[thetraveler]

So people that are just trying to document their life - a trip, a party, or maybe a special occasion - to preserve a picture of their memories are just copying? Seems a bit harsh.

Really?
To people on a photo web site where they are trying to get c/c?
To encourage do one's best is being harsh?

'OK, guys. Get out there and being mediocre.'

You're just being counter-dependent, I think.

[Donald]

Could we all please remember the underpinning ethos of this forum, which is about being polite and constructive whilst nevertheless conveying held points of view and opinions. Nobody is trying to silence anyone, but let's keep ot respectful.

Thanks, one and all.