Polariser plus SLT - blotchy sky problem

[Juanito200]

Thanks Greg- I agree about the file size reduction in the second photo, the full sized file isn't as bad as the jpeg. In the first photo however, the RAW file's banding is equally visible... I am having mixed emotions about the a77...

[Greg Beetham]

Hi John I can still see in the last one I posted previously a slightly ragged transition at the top in the .psd to .jpg conversion (using downsizing the .psd too 1000pixels on the long side first procedure) so I was thinking that the file wasn’t quite big enough at around 190Kb so I did another one from the large .psd (which btw mysteriously became 57Mb when saved from the 11Mb .arw file) at around 230Kb to see if that smoothed it out better, and it did seem to help a bit but didn’t completely disappear the uppermost slightly ragged transition. Actually I can even see it very faintly in largest screen view of the 57Mb .psd ‘thumbprint’ but you have to scroll the image up to the top of the screen and look up at it from a low angle to just make it out and you have to know what you are looking for (hard too see), so now I’m wondering if the program is not converting the .raw properly in the first place or is the image generation broken somewhere else, graphics display driver maybe, but surely not everyone’s graphics display would be equal in that regard.
Funny thing though I discovered you can open an .arw file and then save it directly to the web and the .jpg conversion happens in the save for the web dialog and settings screen and so far the best blemish free .jpg (no visible bands, brush strokes or ragged transitions) I have been able to generate is by resizing the .arw to 1000pixels (but not saved on close) on the long side then saving for the web at the highest jpeg quality level, unfortunately the image was about 405Kb so I can’t show it too you, pity because it’s a good one…finally, I think that will be my new way of doing photos now as the quality is better than using the camera JPEG even at the normal size, and better than using the .psd as well.
What you can’t do with that procedure is fix a dust spot, you have to open the saved .jpg again for that, but you can pre-fiddle with it in the RAW editor in a number of ways if you want too before opening the file.
Greg
Second attempt at generating a slightly larger .jpg but using the .arw file (the best one as mentioned above is too large to upload). As you can readily see it has slightly ragged transitions etc. but the larger file is almost free of them.

DSC04015dowsized-raw.jpg (180.18 KiB) Viewed 2107 times

[edrice]

Well, I just got around to installing the ACR beta release and distortion-wise, I can't tell any difference between the jpg and the raw, which must mean that they have a profile in there. But when I checked the drop-down box, ACR doesn't list one for the RX100. Nevertheless, when I click back and forth between jpg and raw, there is no movement.

I maybe missed this elsewhere but Gary Friedman has the answer. The RX100 applies distortion correction to the raw in addition to the jpg, so there would be no need for a lens profile in ACR (at least for distortion purposes). This make sense.

http://friedmanarchives.blogspot.com/20 ... -lens.html

Ed