On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Chris Barker <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Exactly, I don't think that any of the setting is used for RAW production.
> But, as we have decided before this, something sets the "assumptions" for
> the displays of the RAW previews in whichever application you are using. In
> some ways I am glad that Aperture is (probably) neutral, but perhaps it's
> time I experimented a bit.
It depends on what you mean by "raw production." Raw is, by one
definition, the state of the capture uninfluenced by any firnware or
software setting, but I am thinking about the various options given
when one sets about to make the raw information viewable. Studio
provides some options which other raw converters don't, matching the
software to the firmware. (I hope that is an accurate way of putting
it.) Other converters don't so nearly match software to firmware,
which is not to say that they are bad, just that it would be less
accurate to say the camera is meant to do this or that on the basis of
that sort of software. I don't know if Aperture is neutral. Studio
or Master is the only software I have run across which matches
software to firmware (again, I hope that is the correct way to put
it).
If you mean something else by "neutral," I'm having some problem
conceiving what it might be, since a raw file without some kind of
leading assumptions in the form of settings is not a thing that can be
viewed. What would be the basis for your claim or hope as to
Aperture's neutrality?
Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|