A place to seek advice and answers on those particularly challenging issues.
8 posts Page 1 of 1
The wedding of last week-end ended wth about 150 shots from my wife's new Sony bridge and 300 from my Canon 20D. See my post with the links:
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=4005

That was a good opportunity to compare the speed and ease of editing of the jpegs and raws. Those photos were meant to be a complement to the (good) official photographer's reportage and formals. No need to use advanced editing, just global adjustments such as those in the ACR version of PSE6. I wanted to get the galleries for the web, then send a CD with a low res set for display and a high res one for printing.

That's what I did.
1- Monday: imported all jpegs and raws in the organizer.
2- I spent several hours culling, tagging and rating all photos
3- I left the computer do an incremental backup of my catalog by night.
4- Tuesday: Nearly all photos needed some adjustment or cropping, daylight shots had very contrasty lights and shadows, artificial light was fluorescent or coloured spots... I started with the editing of the jpegs from the Sony. From the organizer I selected all two stars rating photos, and saved them in a new directory after editing. With my old computer, that took me about one minute per photo. Then, also from the organizer, I copied the selected raw files to a new directory, and started editing with ACR, without opening in PSE, just clicking 'done' to save the settings to the xmp sidecar files. I was happy to use the multiple editing feature available in the PSe6 version of ACR when there was 3 to 6 photos with the same lighting. I could adjust the lighting for the all batch, then crop/straighten each one before clicking 'done'. This feature compensated for the longer time needed to load the raw files in ACR, so that it took me also one minute per photo.
5- I used PSE6 multiple file editing to batch edit the 400 or so photos for the next night. With my slow computer, that accounted for about 7 hours... But my low resolution set was ready on Wednesday morning, and it was not long to create the web galleries in Elements and upload them to my site.
6- On Wednesday night, I did the same batch to get the high resolution set. I could burn both version to CD and send them to the family. They should have received it tomorrow (Saturday).

I think I could have done much better with a more powerful and recent computer. I don't know about the difference of speed between ACR in Elements and Lightroom. The most obvious way for me to save one day would have been to use my wife's laptop to process the second night batch the same night.. I'll think about it next time.
Summary: be it jpeg or raw, one minute editing per photo. Then a little more for nightly batch editing.
Michel B
PSE6, 11,12,13.1 - LR 5.7 Windows 7 64 - OneOne Photo Perfect Suite - Canon 20D, Pana TZ6 - Fuji X100S
Most used add-ons: Elements+


Mes Galeries
Michel...

I notice my raw image have a lot more noise than mt jpegs. Are you seeing that also?
~kimi~
Gone Crazy... Back Soon...


Gallery ~ a la kimi

My Blog

kimboustany.com
I did not notice such a difference with my Canon 20D or G6, but I have read this remark many times. I suppose it is due to stronger noise reduction algorithms for the jpegs. Anyway I prefer some noise left rather than a 'plastic look'... old acquaintance with grainy Tri-X or HP. I'll have a lot of stuff to test this, because I shot a lot of 1600 ASA (and some 3200) last Saturday. Noise is not such a problem for websized pictures, but for 20x30cm enlargements it is pretty obvious and horrible on faces and skin.
Michel B
PSE6, 11,12,13.1 - LR 5.7 Windows 7 64 - OneOne Photo Perfect Suite - Canon 20D, Pana TZ6 - Fuji X100S
Most used add-ons: Elements+


Mes Galeries
Kimi,

Yes RAW will have more noise, because it is RAW - i.e. unprocessed by your camera when it converts the data from the sensor to a jpeg it does a lot of tweaking, including noise, saturation, and more.

The ACR will allow some noise control, Photoshop CS3/Elements also support some noise suppression, with the end being relatively the same thing in terms of noise and its impact on your images.

I uses the basic noise reduction features in ACR and Noise Ninja when needed and would prefer to not let my camera mess with my image and let me take the creative control of the entire process.
John
I know I will get more noise on my raw images. But it seems to be progressively getting worse. I did a test the other day. Took the same image in both raw and jpeg. Even the jpeg had more noise than I thought was acceptable.

I am going to go back to shooting in jpeg for a couple of weeks. Just too see....
I hate the plastic look my noise removal software gives.

The truth is the camera needs to go in for a check-up and I just can't find the 6 weeks to let it go.
So I make excuses. :bigwink:
~kimi~
Gone Crazy... Back Soon...


Gallery ~ a la kimi

My Blog

kimboustany.com
Kimi,
Just remember that you can open your jpegs in ACR and get th benefit of the ACR workflow.
Chas
Chas's Gallery
f/16 on a sunny day.....:)
yep!!

I have a reshoot this weekend of a family. The last images had so much digital noise that I wouldn't be able to print an 8x10. This time I am shooting jpeg. I'll see the difference...
~kimi~
Gone Crazy... Back Soon...


Gallery ~ a la kimi

My Blog

kimboustany.com
Kimi,
with a DSLR, be it Nikon, Canon, Olympus or other, the problem of digital noise should not be a problem with up to ISO 800 for printing 8x10. Here are a few ideas:
1- In a wedding, the night scenes almost always require 1600 ASA, wide aperture and not too slow shutter speed. Think of dance shots or bringing the wedding cake with most lights off... Don't wait for the wedding and do tests before to be ready.
2- To be able to compare raw and jpeg, do tests with your camera set to raw+jpeg if your camera provides this feature. With Canon, you can also shoot raw and process with Raw Image Task (not Digital Photo Professional) and process to jpeg with the very same algorithms used in your camera; Nikon may have such a feature?
3- Beware of you display: the only meaningful test is to print tests at the final size of crops of your shots.
4- Chas: editing jpegs with ACR cannot eliminate the in-camera noise removal processing; the raw processing advantage is not there.
5- Appraise the kind of digital noise you are getting: chroma or luminance, and find your best noise removal solution. Chroma noise is easier to reduce with Elements, CS or your noise removal software, Noise Ninja or Neatimage for example
6- Don't try to eliminate all luminance noise. This leaves a slightly grainy appearance which may be ok except for faces or shiny surfaces like cars.
7- Last trick I am presently trying with recent 1600 ISO shots: after a strong chroma noise removal and conservative luminance removal with Neat image, I add noise (monochromatic, uniform, strength 2) to transform 'plastic' look into 'velvet' look. Great for faces. Keep in mind that noise removal requirements are different depending on different parts of the image, which may mean masking.

Edit: 2 examples,3200 ISO 1/15th, f:4.5
Raw processed:
http://www.prestophoto.com/photos/image/1007567/21411
Out of camera jpeg:
http://www.prestophoto.com/photos/image/1007568/21411

The main difference is white balance, but hopefully, you'll notice the improvement on noise.
Michel B
PSE6, 11,12,13.1 - LR 5.7 Windows 7 64 - OneOne Photo Perfect Suite - Canon 20D, Pana TZ6 - Fuji X100S
Most used add-ons: Elements+


Mes Galeries
8 posts Page 1 of 1

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron