Netherlands56
Newbie
Posts: 17
If love won't save us, maybe courtesy will
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: August 02, 2009, 01:49:10 PM » |
|
Phew, lot's a questions.
This is a very interesting topic, I hope I can learn and understand all that is being said! So I hope you all won't mind if I ask a question now an than. Ya Me Not at all. And by FSViewer I was indeed talking about Faststone Image viewer. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ya Me
|
|
« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2009, 02:19:09 PM » |
|
Netherlands56
If I may ask about Faststone Image viewer Is it better to have a program like that to view your images than Windows Explorer? If you just want a quick view. Ya Me |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If I Don't Ask .. Who Will?
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #17 on: August 02, 2009, 02:25:28 PM » |
|
Qimage does not give me a neutral white balance.
The first picture is what Canon's own Digital Photo Pofessional makes of it, as far as I can tell the WB is ok,
The next is (a screenshot of) the thumb in Qimage, and you have to believe me: the jpg and the print look the same. It is not a thumb-problem, the washed out colors carried through to the jpg en the prints. The Qimage illustration does not look "washed out" to me, just underexposed a little and in that state, the WB will be hard to judge. As Fred has already said, other programs have pre-sets, and the Canon one initially processes in the same way as for in-camera jpeg's. As your Qimage view is dark, you need to use the Refine feature where using one of the segments and/or the Fill you will get a well balanced image. You can White Balance there too but do that first. Attached is an example of before & after refine where camera exposure was set so the light wing area was not overexposed; Fill was used to balance up the overall image. If you are not familiar with the refine features, there is a separate raw processing guide here http://ddisoftware.com/tech/qimage/qimage-raw-processing-a-guide/Terry. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 02, 2009, 02:32:43 PM by Terry-M »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ya Me
|
|
« Reply #18 on: August 02, 2009, 02:38:16 PM » |
|
The Qimage illustration
Terry If I may ask, was image 2 compressed more than image 1? Ya Me |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If I Don't Ask .. Who Will?
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #19 on: August 02, 2009, 02:44:00 PM » |
|
If I may ask, was image 2 compressed more than image 1? Image 2 is the raw file converted to jpeg at 100% quality. Image 1 is the raw file with no Fill. It is just a screen snap of the full page editor, with both images on the page, in HQ mode, so it's really all at screen resolution Terry. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #20 on: August 02, 2009, 02:55:10 PM » |
|
I'm still not impressed - Qimage does not give me a neutral white balance. Just to clarify, Qimage raw takes the camera WB and does not adjust in any way, you can do that in the refine screen. My experience with a 350D is that Auto WB is useless and the pre-set values nearly always need some adjustment in the refine screen. One other thought about The Qimage illustration does not look "washed out" to me, just underexposed a little My 350D tends to overexpose so I nearly always use it with negative compensation for raw. Maybe the 500D is different and tends to underexpose or expose for highlights (I may have read that in a review). That may explain the differences you are seeing - it's a new camera with different characteristics. Try a bit of plus exposure compensation - check the camera histogram after taking the shot. Also, use some raw refine fill in Qimage, which can be + or -. Terry. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ya Me
|
|
« Reply #21 on: August 02, 2009, 03:00:13 PM » |
|
Image 2 is the raw file converted to jpeg at 100% quality. Image 1 is the raw file with no Fill. It is just a screen snap of the full page editor, with both images on the page, in HQ mode, so it's really all at screen resolution
Terry Am I understanding correct Image 2 jpg on Top Image 1 raw file Bottom Take picture Ya Me |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If I Don't Ask .. Who Will?
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #22 on: August 02, 2009, 03:06:53 PM » |
|
Am I understanding correct
Image 2 jpg on Top
Image 1 raw file Bottom
Take picture Not take picture with camera, I have a little program that allows you to copy what is on the screen. You can do the same with the Print Screen button on your keyboard and then copy into the Windows Paint program to edit & save. Terry. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Netherlands56
Newbie
Posts: 17
If love won't save us, maybe courtesy will
|
|
« Reply #23 on: August 02, 2009, 03:35:03 PM » |
|
Qimage does not give me a neutral white balance.
The first picture is what Canon's own Digital Photo Pofessional makes of it, as far as I can tell the WB is ok,
The next is (a screenshot of) the thumb in Qimage, and you have to believe me: the jpg and the print look the same. It is not a thumb-problem, the washed out colors carried through to the jpg en the prints. The Qimage illustration does not look "washed out" to me, just underexposed a little and in that state, the WB will be hard to judge. As Fred has already said, other programs have pre-sets, and the Canon one initially processes in the same way as for in-camera jpeg's. As your Qimage view is dark, you need to use the Refine feature where using one of the segments and/or the Fill you will get a well balanced image. You can White Balance there too but do that first. Attached is an example of before & after refine where camera exposure was set so the light wing area was not overexposed; Fill was used to balance up the overall image. If you are not familiar with the refine features, there is a separate raw processing guide here http://ddisoftware.com/tech/qimage/qimage-raw-processing-a-guide/Terry. You prove my point exactly: as you say "The Qimage illustration does not look "washed out" to me, just underexposed a little", because the picture is definitely not underexposed, I used a flash, as I say, the first picture is accurate, what Qimage makes of it is not. And I'm aware of the raw refinement possibilities, and I can correct this image somehow that way, but it's simply not true that Qimage leaves the WB alone. I want it to give an accurate "as shot" white balance by default. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Netherlands56
Newbie
Posts: 17
If love won't save us, maybe courtesy will
|
|
« Reply #24 on: August 02, 2009, 03:38:39 PM » |
|
Netherlands56
If I may ask about Faststone Image viewer Is it better to have a program like that to view your images than Windows Explorer? If you just want a quick view. Ya Me It's fast and it's free, but - as someone in this topic said - it's not color profile aware. It's a lot more versatile as a viewer than Windows Explorer, that's for sure. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ya Me
|
|
« Reply #25 on: August 02, 2009, 03:43:16 PM » |
|
it's not color profile aware. It's a lot more versatile as a viewer than Windows Explorer, that's for sure.
Thanks .. I was just thinking as viewer Ya Me |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If I Don't Ask .. Who Will?
|
|
|
|
admin
|
|
« Reply #26 on: August 02, 2009, 03:47:25 PM » |
|
How did you get FastStone to display a 500D raw file? I downloaded the latest version (3.9) and it is not even compatible with the 500D. When you try to display a 500D raw photo in FastStone, you get a magenta image that is full of interpolation artifacts. Here's the FastStone conversion and Qimage conversion of a 500D raw that I downloaded from Imaging Resource.
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #27 on: August 02, 2009, 04:21:43 PM » |
|
I took a fast look at that Fast stone viewer, and it states that the WB will be reset to the camera setting.
So WB is adjusted before the fact.
Fred
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Netherlands56
Newbie
Posts: 17
If love won't save us, maybe courtesy will
|
|
« Reply #28 on: August 02, 2009, 08:44:38 PM » |
|
How did you get FastStone to display a 500D raw file? I downloaded the latest version (3.9) and it is not even compatible with the 500D. When you try to display a 500D raw photo in FastStone, you get a magenta image that is full of interpolation artifacts. Here's the FastStone conversion and Qimage conversion of a 500D raw that I downloaded from Imaging Resource.
Mike
This topic is not about FSViewer, but I don't know what's going wrong - I (like you?) downloaded a CR2 file, from Imaging Resource: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/T1I/T1IhSLI12800.CR2.HTM, FSViewer (yes, v 3.9) converts it flawlessly, it looks like this (first picture) The thumb of the CR2 in Qimage looks - unbelievably - like this (second picture), but when I use Qimage to make an email sized copy it looks like the third picture. Nothing like the thumb, but still: drab. Aaarg. Weird. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
admin
|
|
« Reply #29 on: August 02, 2009, 10:28:39 PM » |
|
This topic is not about FSViewer, but I don't know what's going wrong - I (like you?) downloaded a CR2 file, from Imaging Resource: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/T1I/T1IhSLI12800.CR2.HTM, FSViewer (yes, v 3.9) converts it flawlessly, it looks like this (first picture) The thumb of the CR2 in Qimage looks - unbelievably - like this (second picture), but when I use Qimage to make an email sized copy it looks like the third picture. Nothing like the thumb, but still: drab. Aaarg. Weird. I don't think your FSViewer is decoding the raw file at all! I think it's simply ripping the embedded JPEG out of the raw: you're never even seeing the raw photo. In FSViewer, press F12 to get the settings dialog and then click the "RAW" tab. Take a look at the second dropdown labeled "Batch convert raw files in" and see what setting is there. I bet it is set to "Embedded Preview Image". Change it to "Actual Size" and you'll get the real raw photo: the ugly magenta mess. Mike |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Qimage registration expired? New lifetime licenses are only $59.99!
