Student/Newb needs help with RAW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dje

From what I've read, with LR HDR Merge, only very basic processing is done by LR on the raw files before merging. In particular, interpolation from 12/14 bit to 16 bit and de-mosaicing. Eric Chan from Adobe is quoted in this article. He refers to this data as "linear raw RGB". The resulting HDR DNG file is then developed further in LR with such things as White Balance, camera profiles etc being applied.

I have no information on the Enfuse plug-in.

Dave

---

Interesting article. I didn't know about the added functions in LR to make HDR out off RAW.
May I order my thoughts? In normal conversion the sequence is demosaicing, meaning creating a RGB raster image, and than adjusting that. In the HDR function the sequence will be demosaicing, merging, adjusting.
It looks logical.

George

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george013

Interesting article. I didn't know about the added functions in LR to make HDR out off RAW.
May I order my thoughts? In normal conversion the sequence is demosaicing, meaning creating a RGB raster image, and than adjusting that. In the HDR function the sequence will be demosaicing, merging, adjusting.
It looks logical.

George

---

Yes George, that's the basic idea. You can do further processing on the raw images before you use the HDR merge function but I believe that a lot of those parametric changes will be ignored in the merging process.

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dje

Yes George, that's the basic idea. You can do further processing on the raw images before you use the HDR merge function but I believe that a lot of those parametric changes will be ignored in the merging process.

Dave

---

It's been a long time since I read anything about LR does this, and I certainly haven't tested all types of parametric adjustments, but at least some are maintained. I just took a set of three bracketed photos--still raw files in LR--increased the saturation in all three, and did an HDR merge. The merge preserved the saturation boost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanK

It's been a long time since I read anything about LR does this, and I certainly haven't tested all types of parametric adjustments, but at least some are maintained. I just took a set of three bracketed photos--still raw files in LR--increased the saturation in all three, and did an HDR merge. The merge preserved the saturation boost.

---

Good to hear Dan. That is consistent with how LR6 treats photos when merging them to create a panoramic image. When shooting highly variable scenes (in terms of exposure) to stitch into a panoramic I make sure to first turn off all "auto" features on my camera (e.g., auto WB, auto ISO, etc.) and set up the camera for the frame of interest. In LR I adjust the tone, etc., of one image then apply those changes to the others that I want to stitch together. Finally I combine them into a panoramic.

Hi Dan and Michael

This article includes a list of the settings that are not carried over to the HDR DNG file. It looks like Saturation is one that is carried over but others on the Basic panel such as Exposure etc aren't.

This article includes a list of the settings that are not carried over to the stitched Pano DNG file. It is a different list to that for HDR merge.

Dave

Cystal

With many discussions that start off asking something simple and straightforward as you have done, some of the more experienced members on here use it lead to a discussion between themselves that is not answering the question you asked and will, I think, we way over your head in terms of knowledge. Don't worry about that.

Everyone was once just at the start of the learning curve where you are just now. Your levels of photographic knowledge and skill will grow. I guarantee it.

So, please, don't be put off by feeling you don't understand the direction in which the discussion has gone here in your thread. You just concentrate on the bits that help you answer your question. And keep asking when things are not clear. Never be put off asking questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donald

. . . With many discussions that start off asking something simple and straightforward as you have done, some of the more experienced members on here use it lead to a discussion between themselves that is not answering the question you asked and will, I think, we way over your head in terms of knowledge. Don't worry about that.

So, please, don't be put off by feeling you don't understand the direction in which the discussion has gone here in your thread. You just concentrate on the bits that help you answer your question. And keep asking when things are not clear. Never be put off asking questions.

---

That is true. And that is good advice.

Do not be put off asking questions.

But equally true is that Crystal Dawn has not yet supplied the answer to the question originally posted by Donald:

Quote:

---

You need to establish whether your camera is capable of taking RAW images. Some cameras do, some don't.

What Canon camera do you have; i.e. what is the model name/number?

---

Speaking only for myself: unanswered simple questions are frustrating when an experienced member is simply awaiting that critical information, for the want to address the newbie’s original concern.

WW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William W

That is true. And that is good advice.

Do not be put off asking questions.

But equally true is that Crystal Dawn has not yet supplied the answer to the question originally posted by Donald:



Speaking only for myself: unanswered simple questions are frustrating when an experienced member is simply awaiting that critical information, for the want to address the newbie’s original concern.

WW

---

I do believe in post #7 Crystal answers the camera model question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBW

I do believe in post #7 Crystal answers the camera model question.

---

All she/he told us Brian is that it's an older $230 model. That, with respect, could mean anything. So, I think Bill's comment is correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donald

All she/he told us Brian is that it's an older $230 model. That, with respect, could mean anything. So, I think Bill's comment is correct.

---

fair enough. Maybe I'm just feeling protective as she shares my daughters name:)