Chuck,
I am still using PSElements 11.0, and it does what you say. I go from
RAW to 16-bit jpeg, take it as far as I can, then convert to 8-bit to
finish. Works fine.
I recently looked at the latest version of Lightroom, and Elements 12.
Found that I can't run the latest Lightroom on my XP system, and found
that many people were unhappy with the "big brother" type changes that
Adobe made in PSE 12. Both will expire unused.
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
On 12/12/2013 8:00 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Well, when I mentioned a RAW converter I never meant Fast Stone. Fast
> Stone only converts RAW files using unknown and unvariable parameters.
> It totally defeats the reason for shooting RAW. It would be better to
> take the camera's JPEGs where one can at least control some of the
> parameters.
>
> I think Elements does some more things that RAW conversion using 16 bits
> but getting documentation of that is difficult. Adobe doesn't lay it
> out on the sidewalk for you to find it. But even it it's only 8 bits
> after RAW conversion that's still pretty good. I agree, Elements is
> probably the best low cost tool.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> On 12/12/2013 6:04 PM, Moose wrote:
>> On 12/12/2013 1:51 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>>> <Snip lots of good stuff>
>>>
>>> Now consider RAW images for a moment. These images typically start life
>>> as either 12 or 14 bit images and get converted to 16 bits on the way to
>>> editing. But these images don't start with a bunch of holes in their
>>> value ranges as does an 8-bit image converted to 16-bits.
>> Nicely said.
>>
>> It's still true that immediately converting a JPEG to 16 bit for editing
>> will lead to fewer disappointing surprises, but
>> Raw* to 16 bit is much better.
>>
>>> The full
>>> range of brightness ranges is real and the image will survive much more
>>> severe editing changes without succumbing to posterization. Compared to
>>> a JPEG image there is also much more leeway in recovering dark shadows
>>> and blown highlights... typically up to a stop on both ends.
>> Would that this were true. Unfortunately, Brian uses 3/4 cameras with
>> limited high ISO performance. Pulling up shadows
>> is like raising ISO, and one quickly runs into noise problems. Not too big
>> an issue, for someone using capable software
>> tools, but ...
>>
>>> For this advantage you only need to use the RAW converter in the first
>>> stage of
>>> editing.
>> Would that this were so simple. FastStone converts Raw to 8 bit THEN edits,
>> not the reverse.
>>
>>> Use the RAW converter to do all of your brightness, contrast,
>>> color balance, saturation, etc. changes up front. Then you can convert
>>> to 8-bit for cropping and other editing changes with little or no effect
>>> on color and brightness. Resizing and sharpening still have some effect
>>> on pixel brightness but is minor compared to other edits.
>>>
>>> My last comment is that FastStone can call external editors. If you
>>> open a RAW file in FastStone I'm sure you can pass it to the Oly RAW
>>> converter before doing further work in FastStone.
>> True, you may browse/view Raw files in FS, then pass them on to other apps.
>>
>>> Or just do all of your work in the RAW editor first and then move to
>>> FastStone after
>>> conversion to JPEGs.
>> Sigh; again not so simple. Oly Viewer converter does no highlight recovery
>> at all, just useless on the top end. One must
>> go to something like RawTherapee, free, and slightly odd, or pay a few $ for
>> PS Elements, AfterShot Pro, or one of the
>> other ones. Personally, I'd go with PSE, as I think ACR is still the best
>> Raw converter.
>>
>> That pretty much does what you've suggested, converts in 16 bit, then does
>> (most?) further editing in 8 bit, at least
>> that's what I read.
>>
>> Raw Moose
>>
>> * You convinced me, and now you succumb to the infidels with RAW images? :-)
>>
>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/12/2013 7:29 AM, Brian Swale wrote:
>>>> I have no practical knowledge of the differences between 64, 32, 16, and
>>>> 8-bit images.
>>>>
>>>> I really don't know what my machine works in. I wouldn't know where to
>>>> look to find out ...
>>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|