Greg Beetham wrote:Ed I was just thinking about the blotchy stuff in the sky appearing lately in images and wondering if it varies if a RAW file is processed twice and the jpegs compared with each other, if the same blotches appear in the same place then it’s most likely the camera (maybe) but if there is a different set of artefacts then the problem is most likely with the software doing the processing, would you agree with that? That’s why I wondered if the RX100 file might have been a processed RAW (I think the camera does RAW, I didn’t actually check).
edrice wrote:Greg, Adobe hasn't come out with a released camera raw yet for the RX100 and the IDC is too painful for me to goof with, so while I still take raw shots I haven't really done anything with them except for a couple so far.
But you have an interesting question. I don't remember what file-type I used in the previous examples, but I should look for NEX or A65 samples where I still have both and compare them. I don't remember if I did this in the past. I may have to retake some test shots.
Greg Beetham wrote:Yeah duh! I was forgetting the camera is too new for Adobe yet, and I have heard that processing in IDC is pretty much equivalent to what you get with a camera processed JPEG anyway, I don’t know how true that is as I’ve only ever dabbled a little bit with the program and I’m no expert at processing RAW but I have done a couple here and there where I wanted to fix something, shadows or highlights mainly, I’d really want the photo to bother with that though.
What is interesting though is somehow you always get a thumbnail of the RAW in any Adobe program no matter if it’s an unknown camera or not, where is it getting that from? The thumbnail must be an image file of some kind in actuality even though the filename has a .RAW file extension, RAW is only a bunch of data…or so I’m led to believe, some say it’s from an embedded JPEG, well if that’s the case why bother shooting RAW + ExFine JPEG for each shot. Maybe the embedded JPEG is a very small file just for the rear screen on the camera or something such and only roughly assembled. But what if Adobe takes a que from how that was done?
I guess Ed if you are going to do a few test shots why not put the camera on a tripod and take exactly the same shot twice in quick succession and see what happens to the blotches then, whether they are the same each time or different, again I’d be inclined to suspect the software if they are noticeably different.
artington wrote:I am using LR 4.2 RC which does process Raw files from the RX-100. I know its not the final telease but I've had no problems with it.
edrice wrote:It's my understanding that they don't have a lens profile for the RX100 yet and I was kinda waiting around and hoping for that.
David Kilpatrick wrote:Just checked ACR raw va JPEG on RX100 - yes, there is a tiny difference but you have to use a large screen preview even to spot the shift.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests