Any reason to shoot in RAW if I don't have PS/LR?etc?
- Thread starter CP93
- Start date
I may be going too far, I usually do. 
But in the raw editor, here is the histogram of the first blue jpg. The dog is back lighted, and we can see that it is this rim of light that is overexposed, the rest is in shadow. In Adobe raw, hold the ALT key down while pressing the mouse on the Exposure slider, and then it shows only the clipped tones (for that Exposure setting). We already knew this time that it was the rim highlights that were clipped.
We know this blue image has white balance wrong, but we can see that in the histogram too, see how red is low, and blue is high? (in the histogram). This of course depends on the subject colors, but this subject has fairly neutral colors, and it is NOT neutral now. Red is too low.
So we adjust WB (here I clicked the WB tool on that white spot above the ears, hoping). This helps a lot, but of course, it shifts red much higher, where it should be (peaks are much more aligned, neutral, which is right for neutral colors, but which would be very wrong if it were a purple dog. ), but which is greater clipping. I reduced Exposure about 1.3 stops, and debated with myself that maybe 2 stops was better. But the advantage is that we can see, we can choose best result.
The rim highlights are still clipped, not much can be done about that now, but it's actually sort of like a feature, a special effect, not a real problem always.
The spike at the right end of the histogram indicates the clipping, and again, holding ALT on the keyboard while pressing the mouse button on the Exposure slider then shows which pixels are clipped. Sometimes that's real good to know.
But in the raw editor, here is the histogram of the first blue jpg. The dog is back lighted, and we can see that it is this rim of light that is overexposed, the rest is in shadow. In Adobe raw, hold the ALT key down while pressing the mouse on the Exposure slider, and then it shows only the clipped tones (for that Exposure setting). We already knew this time that it was the rim highlights that were clipped.
We know this blue image has white balance wrong, but we can see that in the histogram too, see how red is low, and blue is high? (in the histogram). This of course depends on the subject colors, but this subject has fairly neutral colors, and it is NOT neutral now. Red is too low.
So we adjust WB (here I clicked the WB tool on that white spot above the ears, hoping). This helps a lot, but of course, it shifts red much higher, where it should be (peaks are much more aligned, neutral, which is right for neutral colors, but which would be very wrong if it were a purple dog.
), but which is greater clipping. I reduced Exposure about 1.3 stops, and debated with myself that maybe 2 stops was better. But the advantage is that we can see, we can choose best result.
The rim highlights are still clipped, not much can be done about that now, but it's actually sort of like a feature, a special effect, not a real problem always.
The spike at the right end of the histogram indicates the clipping, and again, holding ALT on the keyboard while pressing the mouse button on the Exposure slider then shows which pixels are clipped. Sometimes that's real good to know.
Last edited:
CP93
Senior Member
Thanks all for your valuable input (I accidentally unsubbed from the thread and had to catch up just now).
Turns out I did have an older copy of CS, which I've installed now, but it's CS5 so the older version of Camera Raw hasn't been updated for the 7200.
Follow up question: ViewNX 2 is telling me I can't convert the file: "You cannot apply this operation to unsupported files." What's up with that?
I was going to ask for your thoughts on DNG Converter vs ViewNX, but... :shrug:
Turns out I did have an older copy of CS, which I've installed now, but it's CS5 so the older version of Camera Raw hasn't been updated for the 7200.
Follow up question: ViewNX 2 is telling me I can't convert the file: "You cannot apply this operation to unsupported files." What's up with that?
I was going to ask for your thoughts on DNG Converter vs ViewNX, but... :shrug:
Last edited:
Don Kuykendall_RIP
RIP :(
You might want to try Nikon Capture NX-D RAW Processing Software | Software for Nikon Digital Cameras and see if it will support the D7200
Danno_RIP
Senior Member
I like shooting in RAW... I started the same path most guys talk about but now I shoot RAW only. And I am an amateur. I have the D7200 as well and I use the second slot to back up with RAW + JPEG, but I rarely use the JPEG unless I am at an event and just want to upload something quick to Facebook. RAW just offers so many more opportunities and it is not that hard to learn. I use LR and pay the monthly fee. I am trying to learn PS as well, but that is a bit slower for me... but I am plugging away.
I started out watching YouTube and fiddling with the presets as starting points and I really enjoy it. There is a time impact, but man if you have that one good photo it can become a great one with just a little time invested.
I started out watching YouTube and fiddling with the presets as starting points and I really enjoy it. There is a time impact, but man if you have that one good photo it can become a great one with just a little time invested.
The answer to the title is YES. You do not need PS or LR do process RAW.
Use Nikon Capture NX-D which is free. I use it extensively. The reason to shoot RAW is
. You have more DR - 12/14 bits against 8 bits of JPG format. So you can recover quite a bit of shadow and highlight, rarely feasible with jpeg.
. You need not bother about White Balance. You adjust it in PP.
. You can do NR (Noise reduction), DC (Distortion control) and PC (Picture control) away from camera. That saves a lot of processing time and speeds up the camera. In most cases when you enable these functions the burst sped reduces a couple of frames/sec.
. On the whole you can control a lot more of the outcome with RAW than with jpeg.