message board home
Next
1/8/2011 10:04:46 PM
 
Reply
or ReplyNewSubject
Section 20: Outdoor Photography Subject: Digital Cameras Msg# 762633
|
||||||
|
Spending 15-30 minutes on each frame in Photoshop is just not my favorite thing to do Takes 5 seconds or less to change the exposure for a RAW image in Lightroom. Crop the image to suit, click a preset button and it then produces a JPG of some preselected resolution. Meanwhile, your original RAW is perfectly intact and untouched. Do your editors ever express a preference for anything but a JPG? An actual RAW image or a TIF for example? |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: the effect is as if the image was shot in the camera at that exposure..... so shooting 1/3 or even 2/3 stop increments in the camera doesn't gain you anything .... unless you are shooting JPG and not RAW. I didn't realize that... my brain still defaults to film technology and the example in that link would have been impossible with film. I could make corrections for film in the darkroom, but if an image was too far over or under exposed, the detail I needed just wasn't there so nothing could bring it out. Also, I guess I'm lazy... I set my cameras to record both a RAW file and the best JPG file they are capable of for each frame. 99 times out of 100 I send JPGs to my editors and one of the bracketed JPGs is usually perfect so, just as with film, I grab the one that works and throw away the rest with no more time or effort expended. Spending 15-30 minutes on each frame in Photoshop is just not my favorite thing to do... |
