Photoclubalpha

Chances are, Sony is not doing any in-cam raw processing at all. It's the Apical doing it for them... One thing for sure is that Apical is fed raw data whenever they do the DRO. I'd guess it would be stupid to have two separate routes for raw processing in one cam, and it would be verrrry difficult ...

The image like this is not really so good an example of noisy sky, simply because it's pretty uniformly noisy throughout: http://lh5.ggpht.com/__bYe591qcSo/Slea3ZEcjxI/AAAAAAAABRk/VH3dlQ5cWzQ/s288/DSC0694.jpg Yet it's possible to use it and demonstrate how a cyan boost can sway the 'Sony skies' towa...

Hmmmm.......

And I thought everyone was able to press the 'download' link in Picasa album...
The humankind never stops to disappoint me

Here's a link to the junk album containing the full size developed image (and some other irrelevant junk) - http://picasaweb.google.ru/AgoraBasta/T ... directlink - quite open for dissection. (As it's a JPEG, use an appropriate space, like YIQ or any YCrCb)

Solution is simple - don't do channel shadow clipping (black level subtraction) before demosaicing, then demosaic at a WB settng that fills channels histograms the best possible way, then only apply WB and black per-channel subtraction on your 16bit/channel demosaiced image. I didn't do any of thos...

Just a straightforward conversion in Ufraw, using my regular custom technique (raised black point, logarithmic primary curve, then restore black point automatically in the secondary curve, no camera profile), no image-specific adjustments: http://lh5.ggpht.com/__bYe591qcSo/Slea3ZEcjxI/AAAAAAAABRk/VH...

For those who need a 'Canon sky' at least effort, here goes: in CMYK, do black'=black-0.1*cyan You may prefer a different cyan multiplier, play with it a bit; the cleanest 'Canon skies' turn out somewhere between 0.07 and 0.25 (somewhere there the red noise nearly cancels out, the optimum multiplier...

First off - a deep blue sky is noisy by nature. Just stare into the clear blue sky at midday - you can definitely see that. Second - there are too few red photons there, and then that red is multiplied by a factor of about 2 for daylight after having it's shadow clipping been set too high by default...

.... There's one peculiar use I found of a700 'fine' JPEGs though - shoot high ISO cRAW+JPEG BW, then use the BW jpeg for luma while adding chroma from the cRAW developed/processed to get the best/cleanest colour only, as the luma from the RAW is discarded anyway. Doesn't the in-camera JPEG come fr...

I find the 5DMk2 JPEGs totally horrible - low-contrast details smeared away totally, while higher contrast transitions oversharpened. Funny thing is that Canon seems to use the same jpeg 'strategy' in far cheaper cameras like G9-G10. Those Canon jpegs now look almost as ugly as off some Ricoh R7/R8....

Strangely wrong opinions I find here... Anyway, I repost myself from dpr - http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=29228773 - cRAW does reduce DR at higher spatial frequencies - means it extends/smooths extreme transitions. Yet it does not introduce any loss if your image's...

O Paulo, My settings were - brightness '-2', not '+2'. But that's more about personal preferences and scene specifics. The most important noise-wise are the ZM and 'sharpness' settings. Also, I used DR+ - it's actually producing less noise using DR up to lv+1, than using brightness +2 - that Apical ...