There is no doubt that each company uses its own algorithm or that of
a third party if they buy their chip from the outside. I am aware of
that. You seem to take the position that the settings are unimportant
compared to what the camera maker has set as the default. The point
is that the differences between camera defaults are subtle when
compared to the settings you make yourself. Every maker wants to look
good in the MacBeth card shot at default settings used in many
reviews. And indeed, if you look at those there are not huge
differences.
I am afraid that your suggestion to try it and see would not really
be instructive. Even if you arbitrarily set a standard of comparison
conditions like default settings, matched white balance settings,
etc. All you could say then is that this camera with this group of
settings looks different from that camera with a similar group of
settings, with no idea whether the parameters for the settings are
similar at all. Even the point about differences in the converted
raw file is meaningless because there are differences in converter
curves. A Nikon image converted in Nikon Capture NX does not look
like one converted in ACR even though both are fine converters. I
doubt seriously that the curve for a Canon is the same as the curve
for an Epson in ACR. Some converters do not allow you to ignore the
camera settings. Some or all of them go automatically into the
converted image. I grant you the images in a comparison may look
different, but you would have no idea why, and it would probably not
be hard to make them look very similar as far as color is concerned.
I could be wrong though.
Do you like using your Epson? I was quite taken with it when it came
out.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Apr 23, 2007, at 2:18 PM, Richard wrote:
> Unlike film, the camera company now decides how your images look,
> by their
> sensor characteristics and their processing algorithms. This
> applies even
> when shooting in RAW. Sure you can adjust anything in photoshop,
> but even
> the RAW data is processed in some ways... Try it and see. Get
> couple people
> with a Canon and non-Canon (even Nikon say, or Olympus). TThe
> difference is
> there if you compare it side by side.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|