Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Computers and Software
Post processing age old debate!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 355294" data-attributes="member: 12496"><p>I would word it that the Raw file contains NONE of the camera settings. That is what Raw is... Raw. The Exif does show the camera settings, but they have not been put into the Raw file data. After we see the image, then if we decide Vivid can help, then we can add Vivid. It makes so much difference to see what we are doing.</p><p></p><p> Nikon Raw software can implement those camera settings later, from the Exif (maybe that was your meaning). Adobe Raw software can only add White Balance, sort of, but of course, the original camera WB setting was probably too imprecise anyway (one reason we use Raw, to fix it). We do need to look at White Balance again. Some of us never look at it until later, when we can fix it.</p><p></p><p>The camera settings do affect the preview image we see on the camera rear LCD, and the histogram, which is from an embedded JPG also in the Raw file. </p><p>As much as I dislike Auto WB, I do use it with Raw, just to see something a little closer on the rear LCD, but without much concern at the time.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Me too. Of course, naturally I do always get it correct, but sometimes after I see it, and the scene changes, then I change my mind later. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 355294, member: 12496"] I would word it that the Raw file contains NONE of the camera settings. That is what Raw is... Raw. The Exif does show the camera settings, but they have not been put into the Raw file data. After we see the image, then if we decide Vivid can help, then we can add Vivid. It makes so much difference to see what we are doing. Nikon Raw software can implement those camera settings later, from the Exif (maybe that was your meaning). Adobe Raw software can only add White Balance, sort of, but of course, the original camera WB setting was probably too imprecise anyway (one reason we use Raw, to fix it). We do need to look at White Balance again. Some of us never look at it until later, when we can fix it. The camera settings do affect the preview image we see on the camera rear LCD, and the histogram, which is from an embedded JPG also in the Raw file. As much as I dislike Auto WB, I do use it with Raw, just to see something a little closer on the rear LCD, but without much concern at the time. Me too. Of course, naturally I do always get it correct, but sometimes after I see it, and the scene changes, then I change my mind later. :) [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Computers and Software
Post processing age old debate!
Top