Post Processing Tools - Which are the same as in camera?

[Brownbear]

Thank you Mike... I believe Glenn answered the rest of my question.

Christina,

I can't speak with authority about contest rules and Nat Geo standards but I think it's likely that the stuff that is normally done in post-processing to make a great photo is not only acceptable but also expected. As an example, when minor dodging and burning is allowed, you can be assured that the use of Levels and Curves is also allowed.



The various NIkon Picture Controls (Vivid, Neutral, etc.) affect far more than just the curve. They also affect the sharpening, contrast (which is probably controlled by manipulation of the curve but, not being a Nikon engineer, I don't know), brightness (which also might be controlled by manipulation of the curve) saturation and hue. I know that because I use Nikon post-processing software. You can also control those same parameters in your camera by going into the menus and changing the default settings.

[Brownbear]

Thank you! Very helpful and truly appreciated. Now all I need to know is what Gamma control is...

AFAIK, the camera processes only the first five (5) of the attributes on your list.

And yes, "curves and levels" is a normal processing tool.

Although the camera will sharpen a JPEG, I'd be surprised if the camera had "unsharp mask" built into it's algorithms.

I'm not aware of any camera that can t dodge and burn (at least not yet) as this is a matter of taste, and cameras aren't usually too good at tasts. Shooting RAW and processing it yourself to your own tastes is far more satisfying.

With RAW, if you don't get it right, you can re-do it. Once the camera "bakes in" the predetermined settings in a JPEG, one is limited in what can be done with the file.

IMO, there are other major drawbacks to JPEG files:

a) The camera profile is "cooked" in. In my Canons, I can select: ACR 3.4, ACR 4L4, Adobe Standard, Camera Faithful, Camera Landscape, Camera Neutral, Camera Portrait, and Camera Standard. In JPEG there is one option: "embedded".

b) Fewer WB options with JPEG (As shot, Auto, Custom) than there are with RAW (As shot, Daylight, Cloudy, Shade, Tungsten, Fluorescent, Flash, and Custom).

Glenn

[Mike Buckley]

It states that photographic tools essentially enhance or subdue detail that is already in the photograph whereas computer imaging tends to add elements not already in the image.

If it really states that, I completely disagree. I would instead say that computer imaging does everything that photographic tools do plus adding to and removing elements from the image file. As an example, the fact that darkroom and digital techniques provide the capability to dodge and burn refutes the above statement in my mind.

The general questions that you are asking are really great but, unfortunately, cannot be adequately answered in a few posts on an Internet forum. With experience, which comes with time, you'll sort all of this stuff out. For now, I recommend that you do everything within reason to make the best photos that you can, continue to improve doing that, and not worry about what this or that contest or stock photography agency allows. Once you are capable of making contest winners and photos that stock agencies will promote, you will have the requisite skills to make whatever accommodations are necessary to meet their various requirements.

So, get crackin' on those Lightroom tutorials!

[Brownbear]

Hi Mike,

Yes, it really states that. Thank you for sharing your point of view.

Yes, I agree but I also just wanted to know so I know what is considered standard and not standard.

Will do..

If it really states that, I completely disagree. I would instead say that computer imaging does everything that photographic tools do plus adding to and removing elements from the image file. As an example, the fact that darkroom and digital techniques provide the capability to dodge and burn refutes the above statement in my mind.

The general questions that you are asking are really great but, unfortunately, cannot be adequately answered in a few posts on an Internet forum. With experience, which comes with time, you'll sort all of this stuff out. For now, I recommend that you do everything within reason to make the best photos that you can, continue to improve doing that, and not worry about what this or that contest or stock photography agency allows. Once you are capable of making contest winners and photos that stock agencies will promote, you will have the requisite skills to make whatever accommodations are necessary to meet their various requirements.

So, get crackin' on those Lightroom tutorials!

[Brownbear]

Hi Nancy,

LOL... It is time for someone else to start asking questions, for me to learn from, and I nominate you.

Ok, for all of us following Christina's learning process...
What if we buy her PSE 11 and let her start asking all the questions we need answers to? :0
I just got it, but have not used it yet. Also, just graduated to Jpeg and Raw capture, and she is on to just Raw!
I just gotta catch up
Nancy

[Rob Ekins]

Thank you! Very helpful and truly appreciated. Now all I need to know is what Gamma control is...

This may help,
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...correction.htm


Robbie.

[Brownbear]

Thank you Robbie

This may help,
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...correction.htm


Robbie.

[nimitzbenedicto]

These settings only affect the jpg image (or tiff, if your camera outputs that format).

There is NO in-camera processing of RAW. .

Apologies to readers of this thread.

Sorry, I was misled by the Nikon D5100 camera's menu.

Please don't blame me for thinking that because it was used by Nikon,
it must be the correct "processing" as I understand it to mean.

My Nikon D5100 in its menu says " NEF(RAW) processing".

I am not aware their definition of "processing" is different from Manfred's definition of "processing".

Perhaps, I should quote Manfred and email Nikon to correct the term they used.

I don't think it's good for Nikon to mislead us buyer's with the terms they
use in their cameras.

They should label their menus correctly so users like me aren't notified in
this forum I am wrong.

Thanks.

[Brownbear]

Hi Victor,

No need to apologize... I learned a few new things from your reply. Thank you for sharing.

Apologies to readers of this thread.

Sorry, I was misled by the Nikon D5100 camera's menu.

Please don't blame me for thinking that because it was used by Nikon,
it must be the correct "processing" as I understand it to mean.

My Nikon D5100 in its menu says " NEF(RAW) processing".

I am not aware their definition of "processing" is different from Manfred's definition of "processing".

Perhaps, I should quote Manfred and email Nikon to correct the term they used.

I don't think it's good for Nikon to mislead us buyer's with the terms they
use in their cameras.

They should label their menus correctly so users like me aren't notified in
this forum I am wrong.

Thanks.

[FootLoose]

Thank you Mike,


In a book I have on photography it talks about Darkroom Controls Versus Computer Manipulation and the difference between photographic and image tools,saying some are based in photography and some are based in computer imaging.

Which book is that, Christina?

[Mike Buckley]

My Nikon D5100 in its menu says " NEF(RAW) processing".
I am not aware their definition of "processing" is different from Manfred's definition of "processing".
Perhaps, I should quote Manfred and email Nikon to correct the term they used.
I don't think it's good for Nikon to mislead us buyers with the terms they
use in their cameras.

Though nobody will complain about Nikon's documentation more than I do, I have to side with Nikon on this issue. That's because Nikon isn't contradicting Manfred in my mind.

Keep in mind that there is insufficient space on the LCD to display fully clarified menu items. In this case, the manual does a pretty good job of clarifying the situation on page 183. Immediately beneath the heading "NEF (RAW) Processing," (which is the menu item), it also provides the sub-heading, "Create JPEG copies of NEF (RAW) photographs." In other words, it is explaining that all of the settings that are used in that menu item are being used to create JPEG copies.

I realize that some might argue that the manual should clarify the nuances about what can and cannot be done to RAW image data, but in my mind that's an entirely different subject that entire books are devoted to.

[HenkB]

Hi Christina,

The simple answer is that nearly every control in the Basic panel of the Lightroom Develop module can affect the image in ways that mimic something available in the camera, but not always on a one-to-one, exclusive basis. And virtually always MORE.


In any case, using your list, items 1, 2, 3 and 5 can be adjusted in the Basic panel. 4 is found in the Detail panel (as well as noise reduction). 6 is accomplished variously by the Local Adjustment tools at the top of the column (Crop, Clone/Heal, Red Eye, Gradient Filter (straight and radial) and Adjustment Brush. Master the Basic and Detail panels, then move on to Tone Curve. HSL, et al. is very powerful and, with understanding, can be extraordinarily useful. In general Adobe has designed the software to reflect, top down, a reasonably wholesome workflow that shouldn't involve too much backtracking. But, just because a panel is there does not mean it is necessary to open it and do something with it. The major exception to this (but only if you are partial to the picture control modes - I'm not) may the Camera Calibration panel at the bottom. Here you can find controls that very, very closely mimic the picture modes available for jpeg output in whichever camera produced the file you are working on (vivid, normal, etc.) as well as the choice between the three ACR process versions. If you have only just started using LR, you may never encounter the previous two versions (2003 and 2010). If you have ACR converted files from before your use of LR, you very well may. Most of the other controls in the Calibration panel you may never touch, and that's OK.

Lightroom raw editing is entirely non-destructive. My advice to anyone learning Lightroom editing is to first calibrate your monitor (so that, should you ever wish to print, you will not be disappointed) and then play, play, play! Play first and ask questions later. The play will both inform your questions and jump-start your understanding when you do read and will likely provide a lot of answers to questions before you need to ask them. Learn how far you can go, how far the camera can be pushed when you underexposed, how much detail can be recovered from shadows or highlights. Play with real keepers and clear losers alike. You're not playing enthusiastically enough if you can't get the keepers to look dreadful or the clear losers to look almost plausible. Remember, no data is harmed - you can always select Import at the bottom of the History panel and start over again ... today, tomorrow or next year. For that matter, you can always keep what you have and create a Virtual Copy, click Reset and edit your way into an alternate universe. First get so that you can do what you want in the Basic panel and then, when you notice yourself wanting more than the Basic panel can give you, branch out. Lightroom is astoundingly capable.

I most often crop first and find I spend the next minute or so in Basic (it's only called Basic - it sets the whole mood of the image, the rest is tweaking) and then some indeterminate time with local adjustments. Then, if there are specific effects I'm after, I pick and choose among those controls available below the Basic panel. This almost always involves a minute or so in the Detail panel. Is this how anyone else should use LR? Hardly. It's just how I have co-evolved with what has become my software of choice since I started using Version 1.

[nimitzbenedicto]

Hi Hendrik,

Very informative post about your experiences using Light Room,

Thanks

Hi Christina,

The simple answer is that nearly every control in the Basic panel of the Lightroom Develop module can affect the image in ways that mimic something available in the camera, but not always on a one-to-one, exclusive basis. And virtually always MORE.

================================================== =
Mike,

By the way

I think Manfred's post is very clear.

He said " There is NO in-camera processing of RAW."

I looked it up/googled what NO means and it means "no".

T.

There is NO in-camera processing of RAW.

[Manfred M]

================================================== =
Mike,

By the way

I think Manfred's post is very clear.

He said " There is NO in-camera processing of RAW."

I looked it up/googled what NO means and it means "no".

Victor - a bit of context here.

When I say no in camera processing, I am referring purely to the camera RAW data. It is pure, has no gamma or white balance values assigned, etc. It's what the camera has captured.

The camera will take that data, and if you have set things up that way, convert it to a jpeg (or possibly TIFF) and apply the camera settings. The basic RAW date is still untouched, but your camera has taken that data and converted it to another format.

RAW data cannot be displayed on the screen on the back of your camera; as it has not been assembled into a picture format. This data is converted by your camera into something that you can see. The thumbnail jpeg, as well as the data from the settings on your camera are saved when the camera writes a RAW file to memory card (a.k.a. EXIF data) and the stand-alone sidecar file.

The RAW file, is exactly the way I described it, zero manipulation to the data, until you import it to an editor, where you can manipulate away. If you use Lightroom, it is a parametric editor, so changes that you make are are stored as data (the RAW file is still untouched). If you use Photoshop, the manipulated (destructive editing) is stored in a working format (psd), but again, nothing has changed in the RAW data...

If you look purely at the RAW data, NO changes to the data by the camera. If you look at displayable output, then the camera has taken and manipulated the data, but it is no longer a RAW file. Things get a bit hazier when it comes to Adobe DNG files; while they are refered to as RAW, which is by no means 100% accurate. Some options to retain the basic RAW data, while others manipulate it.

[nimitzbenedicto]

Although I am just a patzer snapshooter, when I say something, I make sure what I say is what I say.

If I am wrong, I will stand up and apologize and say sorry because I am wrong.
I won't resort to "ifs - buts - howevers - not in context " just like those slippery politicians.

May I say categorically.clearly with no slippery ifs-buts-blabitybla
" There is in-camera processing of NEF(RAW)."


Please take note, I am not saying "the NEF(RAW) image itself will be changed."
Just " There is in-camera processing of NEF(RAW)."
Meaning, I will not use an outside software to process this in-camera file "DSC_1776.NEF".
I will process it in-camera.

So, sometime ago using my old Nikon D3100, I took a shot of a girl singing with a guitar in NEF format. Couple of minutes ago, I opened it "DSC_1776.NEF" in my Nikon D3100 camera.

I wanted to process this NEF/RAW in camera so I opened/clicked on "menu" then clicked the following:
menu -> retouch menu -> NEF(RAW) processing -> selected/clicked on the NEF image.
the NEF(RAW) processing LCD comes on.

I click on the following options/edits:
Image quality = fine
Image size = medium
White Balance = cloudy
Exposure Compensation = 0.0
Set Picture Control = standard

I end by clicking on "EXE". a notice " image saved" appears on the LCD
the processed "DSC_1776.NEF" is now saved as a jpg - "CSC-1801.jpg" in-camera

Please take note. This isn't the default thumbnail jpg for LCD viewing.
It's a 3mb saved jpg file.


Here's the jpg image uploaded to imageshack straight from the SD card.
( downsized in imagesshack to 800px to make its file size smaller)


Thanks for viewing.

[Brownbear]

Hi Greg,

The book is called

The Everything - Digital Photography Book by Rick de Garis Doble

Which book is that, Christina?

[Brownbear]

Thank you Hendrik for a very informative and helpful reply.

Hi Christina,

The simple answer is that nearly every control in the Basic panel of the Lightroom Develop module can affect the image in ways that mimic something available in the camera, but not always on a one-to-one, exclusive basis. And virtually always MORE.


In any case, using your list, items 1, 2, 3 and 5 can be adjusted in the Basic panel. 4 is found in the Detail panel (as well as noise reduction). 6 is accomplished variously by the Local Adjustment tools at the top of the column (Crop, Clone/Heal, Red Eye, Gradient Filter (straight and radial) and Adjustment Brush. Master the Basic and Detail panels, then move on to Tone Curve. HSL, et al. is very powerful and, with understanding, can be extraordinarily useful. In general Adobe has designed the software to reflect, top down, a reasonably wholesome workflow that shouldn't involve too much backtracking. But, just because a panel is there does not mean it is necessary to open it and do something with it. The major exception to this (but only if you are partial to the picture control modes - I'm not) may the Camera Calibration panel at the bottom. Here you can find controls that very, very closely mimic the picture modes available for jpeg output in whichever camera produced the file you are working on (vivid, normal, etc.) as well as the choice between the three ACR process versions. If you have only just started using LR, you may never encounter the previous two versions (2003 and 2010). If you have ACR converted files from before your use of LR, you very well may. Most of the other controls in the Calibration panel you may never touch, and that's OK.

Lightroom raw editing is entirely non-destructive. My advice to anyone learning Lightroom editing is to first calibrate your monitor (so that, should you ever wish to print, you will not be disappointed) and then play, play, play! Play first and ask questions later. The play will both inform your questions and jump-start your understanding when you do read and will likely provide a lot of answers to questions before you need to ask them. Learn how far you can go, how far the camera can be pushed when you underexposed, how much detail can be recovered from shadows or highlights. Play with real keepers and clear losers alike. You're not playing enthusiastically enough if you can't get the keepers to look dreadful or the clear losers to look almost plausible. Remember, no data is harmed - you can always select Import at the bottom of the History panel and start over again ... today, tomorrow or next year. For that matter, you can always keep what you have and create a Virtual Copy, click Reset and edit your way into an alternate universe. First get so that you can do what you want in the Basic panel and then, when you notice yourself wanting more than the Basic panel can give you, branch out. Lightroom is astoundingly capable.

I most often crop first and find I spend the next minute or so in Basic (it's only called Basic - it sets the whole mood of the image, the rest is tweaking) and then some indeterminate time with local adjustments. Then, if there are specific effects I'm after, I pick and choose among those controls available below the Basic panel. This almost always involves a minute or so in the Detail panel. Is this how anyone else should use LR? Hardly. It's just how I have co-evolved with what has become my software of choice since I started using Version 1.

[Manfred M]

Although I am just a patzer snapshooter, when I say something, I make sure what I say is what I say.

If I am wrong, I will stand up and apologize and say sorry because I am wrong.
I won't resort to "ifs - buts - howevers - not in context " just like those slippery politicians.

May I say categorically.clearly with no slippery ifs-buts-blabitybla
" There is in-camera processing of NEF(RAW)."


Please take note, I am not saying "the NEF(RAW) image itself will be changed."
Just " There is in-camera processing of NEF(RAW)."
Meaning, I will not use an outside software to process this in-camera file "DSC_1776.NEF".
I will process it in-camera.

So, sometime ago using my old Nikon D3100, I took a shot of a girl singing with a guitar in NEF format. Couple of minutes ago, I opened it "DSC_1776.NEF" in my Nikon D3100 camera.

I wanted to process this NEF/RAW in camera so I opened/clicked on "menu" then clicked the following:
menu -> retouch menu -> NEF(RAW) processing -> selected/clicked on the NEF image.
the NEF(RAW) processing LCD comes on.

I click on the following options/edits:
Image quality = fine
Image size = medium
White Balance = cloudy
Exposure Compensation = 0.0
Set Picture Control = standard

I end by clicking on "EXE". a notice " image saved" appears on the LCD
the processed "DSC_1776.NEF" is now saved as a jpg - "CSC-1801.jpg" in-camera

Please take note. This isn't the default thumbnail jpg for LCD viewing.
It's a 3mb saved jpg file.


Here's the jpg image uploaded to imageshack straight from the SD card.
( downsized in imagesshack to 800px to make its file size smaller)


Thanks for viewing.

Unfortunately all of the hedging is required to ensure that the meaning comes across clearly. This does not seem to be working... While it may seem that we are splitting hairs, from a technical standpoint there is a very important and cirtical difference between the RAW file and any format you choose to output.

Let me try to explain it with an analogy. Assume you have a door that you want to install in your house, but it is too large and won't fit. If you take that door and cut it down to fit, then you will have "manipulated the door" and would have changed the original. To me, that is what you are doing when you modify the original file; it is changed and can no longer be restored to the original state.

If on the other hand, you have a door and you take measurements of it and make a new door based on the scaled measurements, perhaps using a different material and finish, this is more akin to the RAW -> jpg process you describe. The original is untouched and available for future use; effectively you end up with two doors; the original NEF (which has not been changed in any way) and the new jpg (which looks similar, but by no means identical to the first door).

The RAW data has NO in-camera manipulation at all; it is purely a file written by the camera from the sensor data and none of the camera settings are applied to it. No gamma settings, no white balance adjustment, no sharpening, lens distortion correction, CA adjustment, etc. etc. Your jpeg, regardless of how it is created, has been modified and there is no way to restore it to its orignal state.

This may not be an important difference to you, back to the door example, if I needed another similar, but not identical door, I would go back to the original, not the copy to create another door. The same goes to creating another image. Let's suggest that I need another copy of the original image. For example I need a large print and the only two copies I have are the downsampled low quality jpeg I posted on the web and the orignal RAW file; which one would you use?

[Mike Buckley]

It seems to me that everyone actively participating in the discussion understands the difference between "post-processing" RAW files and JPEG files whether we use the camera's software or computer-based software to do that. At some point it seems that the differences of thought are almost entirely a matter of semantics and, for me, we have reached that point.

[Manfred M]

It seems to me that everyone actively participating in the discussion understands the difference between "post-processing" RAW files and JPEG files whether we use the camera's software or computer-based software to do that. At some point it seems that the differences of thought are almost entirely a matter of semantics and, for me, we have reached that point.

Mike - I think that depends on your needs and point of view. For a techie like me, this makes a significant difference, but for other people, it may make little to no difference.

I'm going through a similar situation at work right now. We need to change the design of an existing piece of equipment which we had stamped hard copy drawings for (long and sordid legal story why we do not have a CAD version).

These got misplaced when someone retired and the suggestion was made that we reverse engineer the piece of equipment. This is really the last resort, because we would be guessing at all of the dimensions, tolerances and specs, even if we can get the measurements from the original. The part needs to meet regulatory requirements, so making the fixture to the original stamped drawings means the parts are compliant with the law. Without that, we would have to go through an expensive testing and requalification program, including at least one round of destructive testing. The stamped, original drawings are our RAW files, the fixture is our jpg. Reverse engineering it might work, eventually and will be very expensive for a short stop-gap problem.