Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2005-02-01 by Steve Kale
A question for those more used to working in RAW format. Is there any advantage to resizing an image in RAW (eg using Capture One Pro) rather than in PS? Assume I know how big I want the final image and am happy with whichever way will deliver the better results for a known final print size. Thanks Steve
2005-02-01 by ldina
Hi Steve. I have tried resizing in PS, ACR, C1, etc, but have a hard time seeing a lot of difference. Even Genuine Fractals. FWIW, I finally settled on resizing in PS, since I have a choice of different algorithms for resizing, ie, Bicubic smoother, bicubic sharper, etc. If I don't like it, there is always Ctrl-Z (excuse me....Command-Z for you Mac users). I used to use Genuine Fractals to upsize my images to create large trade show posters, but I find PS does just as good a job. Lou --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Kale" <stevekale@b...> wrote: > > A question for those more used to working in RAW format. Is there any advantage to > resizing an image in RAW (eg using Capture One Pro) rather than in PS? Assume I know > how big I want the final image and am happy with whichever way will deliver the better
> results for a known final print size. > > Thanks > > Steve
2005-02-02 by tariqgibranstudio
You may wish to check out this article:http://www.outbackphoto.com/workflow/wf_60/ essay.html There is also a free plug in available at this site which will basically automate the procedure in the above article. What you certainly want to do is make sure you output the full 16 bit(vs 8 bit) image file out of raw. Photoshop CS contains new bicubic sharpening algorithims such as Bicubic Smooth for going up in size and Bicubic Sharper for going down which supposedly achieves excellent results in one step vs. the older "stepping" method(going up in 10% increments until desired size is reached). I have always either used the stepping method with plain Bicubic OR the plug in PhotoZoom. I have yet to really see a visible difference in any of the supposed super sizing plug ins vs. the plain stepping method. Have yet to experiment with the free plug in above though. Hope this helps. Tariq --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Kale" <stevekale@b...> wrote:
> > A question for those more used to working in RAW format. Is there any advantage to > resizing an image in RAW (eg using Capture One Pro) rather than in PS? Assume I know > how big I want the final image and am happy with whichever way will deliver the better > results for a known final print size. > > Thanks > > Steve
2005-02-02 by John Vitollo
"Steve Kale" wrote: > Is there any advantage to > resizing an image in RAW (eg using Capture One Pro) rather than in PS? ACR's resizing is better with a camera that has non-square pixels - such as the Fuji S2. If using a Canon camera there is no advantage using ACR or Photoshop. What camera are you using?
2005-02-02 by ldina
That's right. I forgot about cameras with unconventional pixel shapes. This has been discussed quite a bit on the Adobe Camera Raw forum, including contributions by Thomas Knoll (author or PS and ACR), and Bruce Fraser, author of Real World Camera Raw. I agree, with most cameras, there is no difference. I shoot with a Canon 20D and see no difference between using ACR or PS. I prefer to do it in PS, where I have more choices and more control. Lou --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John Vitollo" <jvlist@c...> wrote: > > "Steve Kale" wrote: > > Is there any advantage to > > resizing an image in RAW (eg using Capture One Pro) rather than in PS? > > ACR's resizing is better with a camera that has non-square pixels - such as the Fuji S2. > > If using a Canon camera there is no advantage using ACR or Photoshop. > > What camera are you using?
2005-02-02 by Steve Kale
Hi Lou and John I am using a Canon 1Ds MK II. Still getting used to it and working in RAW. [I must admit I find going back to my Canon lenses (28-70 F2.8L and 70-200 F2.8L) from my Contax medium format lenses quite a drop in sharpness but maybe I have still just got a way to go before I am used to using the new camera.] Thanks for the help Steve
> From: ldina <lbdina@...> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 02:44:35 -0000 > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? > > > > That's right. I forgot about cameras with unconventional pixel > shapes. > > This has been discussed quite a bit on the Adobe Camera Raw forum, > including contributions by Thomas Knoll (author or PS and ACR), and > Bruce Fraser, author of Real World Camera Raw. I agree, with most > cameras, there is no difference. I shoot with a Canon 20D and see no > difference between using ACR or PS. I prefer to do it in PS, where I > have more choices and more control. > > Lou > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John Vitollo" > <jvlist@c...> wrote: >> >> "Steve Kale" wrote: >>> Is there any advantage to >>> resizing an image in RAW (eg using Capture One Pro) rather than > in PS? >> >> ACR's resizing is better with a camera that has non-square pixels - > such as the Fuji S2. >> >> If using a Canon camera there is no advantage using ACR or > Photoshop. >> >> What camera are you using? > > > > > > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as > they are often being updated. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same > page. > > Please follow these basic guidelines: > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep > them short. > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. > Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership > without notice. > - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W > printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the > membership. > - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and > guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and > Moderators. See ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² in the Files section: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > > BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT > YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE ³OWNER² AND > ³MODERATORS² OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU > FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY > DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, > USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE ³OWNER² AND ³MODERATORS² OF > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH > DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, > THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR > TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > >
2005-02-02 by Hans VR
Steve Kale wrote: >Hi Lou and John > >I am using a Canon 1Ds MK II. Still getting used to it and working in RAW. > >[I must admit I find going back to my Canon lenses (28-70 F2.8L and 70-200 >F2.8L) from my Contax medium format lenses quite a drop in sharpness but >maybe I have still just got a way to go before I am used to using the new >camera.] > >Thanks for the help > >Steve > > Don't forget that you need to sharpen DSLR images. -- Hans VR www.hansvr.com
2005-02-02 by ldina
Steve, Nice! I love my 20D, but it doesn't have the rez of your new toy. Some of Canon's digital cameras (I think a rather small sampling) have had some problems with front or back focusing. My first 300D had a definite back focusing problem. I finally proved it to the store who sold it to me, and they gave me another camera, which was right on the money. Before I bought my 20D, I tested it for focusing accuracy before I bought it. It is also fine. I mention this because the impression with my first camera was one of unsharp images in general. It probably just wasn't properly calibrated in the factory. I'd focus on the eyes of my subject, and they would be out of focus. Very irritating. I have blown up images to 16X20 from my 300D and 20D that are very sharp and clean. Incredible quality. My old 35mm images would appear soft and mushy in comparison when blown up that large. I would think your 1Ds MK II would be pretty close to your medium format if all is properly calibrated. Good luck with your camera. Lou --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> wrote: > Hi Lou and John > > I am using a Canon 1Ds MK II. Still getting used to it and working in RAW. > > [I must admit I find going back to my Canon lenses (28-70 F2.8L and 70-200 > F2.8L) from my Contax medium format lenses quite a drop in sharpness but > maybe I have still just got a way to go before I am used to using the new > camera.] > > Thanks for the help > > Steve > > > > From: ldina <lbdina@c...> > > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > > Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 02:44:35 -0000 > > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? > > > > > > > > That's right. I forgot about cameras with unconventional pixel > > shapes. > > > > This has been discussed quite a bit on the Adobe Camera Raw forum, > > including contributions by Thomas Knoll (author or PS and ACR), and > > Bruce Fraser, author of Real World Camera Raw. I agree, with most > > cameras, there is no difference. I shoot with a Canon 20D and see no > > difference between using ACR or PS. I prefer to do it in PS, where I > > have more choices and more control. > > > > Lou > > > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John Vitollo" > > <jvlist@c...> wrote: > >> > >> "Steve Kale" wrote: > >>> Is there any advantage to > >>> resizing an image in RAW (eg using Capture One Pro) rather than > > in PS? > >> > >> ACR's resizing is better with a camera that has non-square pixels - > > such as the Fuji S2. > >> > >> If using a Canon camera there is no advantage using ACR or > > Photoshop. > >> > >> What camera are you using? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as > > they are often being updated. > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > > > > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to > > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same > > page. > > > > Please follow these basic guidelines: > > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep > > them short. > > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. > > Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership > > without notice. > > - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W > > printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the > > membership. > > - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and > > guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and > > Moderators. See ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² in the Files section: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > > > > BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT > > YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE ³OWNER² AND > > ³MODERATORS² OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU > > FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY > > DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, > > USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE ³OWNER² AND ³MODERATORS² OF > > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH > > DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, > > THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR > > TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE > > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE
> > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
2005-02-02 by Steve Kale
Yes of course. I guess I mean sharpness in the depth of field more than anything. I did a bunch of landscape shots with a tripod at f22 and have been a little disappointed. Like I said, still getting used to the camera and lenses again.
> From: Hans VR <hvr@...> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 12:48:07 +0100 > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? > > > Steve Kale wrote: > >> Hi Lou and John >> >> I am using a Canon 1Ds MK II. Still getting used to it and working in RAW. >> >> [I must admit I find going back to my Canon lenses (28-70 F2.8L and 70-200 >> F2.8L) from my Contax medium format lenses quite a drop in sharpness but >> maybe I have still just got a way to go before I am used to using the new >> camera.] >> >> Thanks for the help >> >> Steve >> >> > Don't forget that you need to sharpen DSLR images. > > -- > Hans VR > www.hansvr.com
2005-02-02 by Hans VR
Steve Kale wrote: >Yes of course. I guess I mean sharpness in the depth of field more than >anything. I did a bunch of landscape shots with a tripod at f22 and have >been a little disappointed. Like I said, still getting used to the camera >and lenses again. > I think f/22 is probably not the sweet spot for those 2 lenses, I guess you see some diffraction softness. -- Hans VR www.hansvr.com
2005-02-02 by Steve Kale
Yes you are probably right. Any ideas where I can find an analysis of these lenses and hence their "sweet spots"? Thanks Steve
> From: Hans VR <hvr@...> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 13:10:54 +0100 > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? > > > Steve Kale wrote: > >> Yes of course. I guess I mean sharpness in the depth of field more than >> anything. I did a bunch of landscape shots with a tripod at f22 and have >> been a little disappointed. Like I said, still getting used to the camera >> and lenses again. >> > I think f/22 is probably not the sweet spot for those 2 lenses, I guess > you see some diffraction softness. > > -- > Hans VR > www.hansvr.com >
2005-02-02 by tariqgibranstudio
In my experience, most lenses will perform best around F8-F11. That seems to be particularly true with a good zoom lens. Some ;primes hit their peak a bit earlier, say F5.6 to F8. F22 almost certainly will result in loss of sharpness due to defraction. Also, Canon Cmos chips will need much more sharpening than you are most likely used to giving a CCD based medium format Digital Back. I use a Fuji S2(CCD) and have often noticed that Canon Digital images look almost blurred and very soft until given a hefty sharpening. I have even been reading the the new 1ds 11 has an even stronger Anti-aliasing filter than the 1ds. Tariq --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> wrote: > Hi Lou and John > > I am using a Canon 1Ds MK II. Still getting used to it and working in RAW. > > [I must admit I find going back to my Canon lenses (28-70 F2.8L and 70-200 > F2.8L) from my Contax medium format lenses quite a drop in sharpness but > maybe I have still just got a way to go before I am used to using the new > camera.] > > Thanks for the help > > Steve > > > > From: ldina <lbdina@c...> > > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > > Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 02:44:35 -0000 > > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? > > > > > > > > That's right. I forgot about cameras with unconventional pixel > > shapes. > > > > This has been discussed quite a bit on the Adobe Camera Raw forum, > > including contributions by Thomas Knoll (author or PS and ACR), and > > Bruce Fraser, author of Real World Camera Raw. I agree, with most > > cameras, there is no difference. I shoot with a Canon 20D and see no > > difference between using ACR or PS. I prefer to do it in PS, where I > > have more choices and more control. > > > > Lou > > > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John Vitollo" > > <jvlist@c...> wrote: > >> > >> "Steve Kale" wrote: > >>> Is there any advantage to > >>> resizing an image in RAW (eg using Capture One Pro) rather than > > in PS? > >> > >> ACR's resizing is better with a camera that has non-square pixels - > > such as the Fuji S2. > >> > >> If using a Canon camera there is no advantage using ACR or > > Photoshop. > >> > >> What camera are you using? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as > > they are often being updated. > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > > > > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to > > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same > > page. > > > > Please follow these basic guidelines: > > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep > > them short. > > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. > > Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership > > without notice. > > - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W > > printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the > > membership. > > - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and > > guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and > > Moderators. See ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² in the Files section: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > > > > BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT > > YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE ³OWNER² AND > > ³MODERATORS² OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU > > FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY > > DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, > > USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE ³OWNER² AND ³MODERATORS² OF > > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH > > DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, > > THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR > > TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE > > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE
> > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
2005-02-02 by José Miguel Ferreira
Its a good idea to turn off the in-camera capture sharpening and do all the sharpening (much needed) sharpening in Photoshop. PK Sharpener does this very well. José
-----Original Message----- From: tariqgibranstudio [mailto:Tariq@...] Sent: mercredi, 2. février 2005 15:28 To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? In my experience, most lenses will perform best around F8-F11. That seems to be particularly true with a good zoom lens. Some ;primes hit their peak a bit earlier, say F5.6 to F8. F22 almost certainly will result in loss of sharpness due to defraction. Also, Canon Cmos chips will need much more sharpening than you are most likely used to giving a CCD based medium format Digital Back. I use a Fuji S2(CCD) and have often noticed that Canon Digital images look almost blurred and very soft until given a hefty sharpening. I have even been reading the the new 1ds 11 has an even stronger Anti-aliasing filter than the 1ds. Tariq --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> wrote: > Hi Lou and John > > I am using a Canon 1Ds MK II. Still getting used to it and working in RAW. > > [I must admit I find going back to my Canon lenses (28-70 F2.8L and 70-200 > F2.8L) from my Contax medium format lenses quite a drop in sharpness but > maybe I have still just got a way to go before I am used to using the new > camera.] > > Thanks for the help > > Steve > > > > From: ldina <lbdina@c...> > > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > > Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 02:44:35 -0000 > > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? > > > > > > > > That's right. I forgot about cameras with unconventional pixel > > shapes. > > > > This has been discussed quite a bit on the Adobe Camera Raw forum, > > including contributions by Thomas Knoll (author or PS and ACR), and > > Bruce Fraser, author of Real World Camera Raw. I agree, with most > > cameras, there is no difference. I shoot with a Canon 20D and see no > > difference between using ACR or PS. I prefer to do it in PS, where I > > have more choices and more control. > > > > Lou > > > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John Vitollo" > > <jvlist@c...> wrote: > >> > >> "Steve Kale" wrote: > >>> Is there any advantage to > >>> resizing an image in RAW (eg using Capture One Pro) rather than > > in PS? > >> > >> ACR's resizing is better with a camera that has non-square pixels - > > such as the Fuji S2. > >> > >> If using a Canon camera there is no advantage using ACR or > > Photoshop. > >> > >> What camera are you using? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as > > they are often being updated. > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > > > > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to > > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same > > page. > > > > Please follow these basic guidelines: > > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep > > them short. > > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. > > Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership > > without notice. > > - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W > > printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the > > membership. > > - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and > > guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and > > Moderators. See ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² in the Files section: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > > > > BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT > > YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE ³OWNER² AND > > ³MODERATORS² OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU > > FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY > > DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, > > USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE ³OWNER² AND ³MODERATORS² OF > > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH > > DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, > > THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR > > TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE > > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE > > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Uns ubscribe> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2005-02-02 by Hans VR
Jos\ufffd Miguel Ferreira wrote: >It\ufffds a good idea to turn off the in-camera capture sharpening and do all the >sharpening (much needed) sharpening in Photoshop. > >PK Sharpener does this very well. > >Jos\ufffd > > > In-camera sharpening setting is irrelevant when shooting RAW. -- Hans VR www.hansvr.com
2005-02-02 by Steve Kale
Funny you should say that. I have used PK Sharpener for some time. I have just been fiddling with sharpening the 1 Ds MK II images and so far I have found that a little (25, 2) sharpening in Capture One Pro does a better job than PK Sharpener Capture Dig Hi Res. More testing to be done.... (yes in camera always off)
> From: José Miguel Ferreira <jmf@...> > Organization: JMF Photo > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 16:43:18 +0100 > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? > > > It¹s a good idea to turn off the in-camera capture sharpening and do all the > sharpening (much needed) sharpening in Photoshop. > > PK Sharpener does this very well. > > José > >
2005-02-02 by Phil Morse
Doesn't the fact that you are using raw negate the in-camera sharpening anyways? Phil Morse Steve Kale wrote:
> More testing to be done.... (yes in >camera always off) > > >>It\ufffds a good idea to turn off the in-camera capture sharpening and do all the >>sharpening (much needed) sharpening in Photoshop. >> >>PK Sharpener does this very well. >> >>Jos\ufffd >> >> >> > >
2005-02-02 by Steve Kale
Thanks - Tariq
> From: tariqgibranstudio <Tariq@...> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 14:28:03 -0000 > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? > > > > In my experience, most lenses will perform best around F8-F11. That seems to > be > particularly true with a good zoom lens. Some ;primes hit their peak a bit > earlier, say F5.6 > to F8. F22 almost certainly will result in loss of sharpness due to > defraction. Also, Canon > Cmos chips will need much more sharpening than you are most likely used to > giving a > CCD based medium format Digital Back. I use a Fuji S2(CCD) and have often > noticed that > Canon Digital images look almost blurred and very soft until given a hefty > sharpening. I > have even been reading the the new 1ds 11 has an even stronger Anti-aliasing > filter than > the 1ds. > > Tariq
2005-02-02 by José Miguel Ferreira
I dont use C1Pro, cant comment on that. I did try several sharpening plug-ins and methods and finally gave my preference to PhotoKit. Not only Im satisfied with the actual sharpening results (for web and inkjet printing) but also prefer the fact that PK uses layers, so the actual image isnt changed, and it supports 16 bit. José
-----Original Message----- From: Steve Kale [mailto:stevekale@...] Sent: mercredi, 2. février 2005 17:41 To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? Funny you should say that. I have used PK Sharpener for some time. I have just been fiddling with sharpening the 1 Ds MK II images and so far I have found that a little (25, 2) sharpening in Capture One Pro does a better job than PK Sharpener Capture Dig Hi Res. More testing to be done.... (yes in camera always off) > From: José Miguel Ferreira <jmf@...> > Organization: JMF Photo > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 16:43:18 +0100 > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? > > > It¹s a good idea to turn off the in-camera capture sharpening and do all the > sharpening (much needed) sharpening in Photoshop. > > PK Sharpener does this very well. > > José > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Uns ubscribe> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2005-02-02 by José Miguel Ferreira
True. But there are times when I switch to fine JPG (family shots, etc ) PK sharpener can be applied en masse through an action, although some shots will benefit from manual tweaking. José
-----Original Message----- From: Phil Morse [mailto:pmorse@...] Sent: mercredi, 2. février 2005 17:53 To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Any advantage to resizing in RAW? Doesn't the fact that you are using raw negate the in-camera sharpening anyways? Phil Morse Steve Kale wrote: > More testing to be done.... (yes in >camera always off) > > >>It¹s a good idea to turn off the in-camera capture sharpening and do all the >>sharpening (much needed) sharpening in Photoshop. >> >>PK Sharpener does this very well. >> >>José >> >> >> > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Uns ubscribe> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2005-02-02 by btvarner
>Lou wrote: > Some of Canon's digital cameras (I think a rather small sampling) > have had some problems with front or back focusing. My first 300D > had a definite back focusing problem. I finally proved it to the > store who sold it to me, and they gave me another camera, which was > right on the money. Lou, Is there a specific method you know of to test for the focusing problem above? If it is determined that this is an issue is the only method to fix, a trip to the factory? I have a 10D that I have always thought had this issues but I have assumed that I would sometimes use to shallow a DOF. Thanks, Bruce Varner http://mywebpages.comcast.net/btvarner/Bruce/photo.htm
2005-02-03 by ldina
Yes, Bruce. You can do a very nice focusing test on any digital camera using the procedure described at the following link. They even have a jpg target to download to conduct your testing. Works like a charm. http://www.photo.net/learn/focustest/ Lou --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "btvarner" <btvarner@e...> wrote: > > >Lou wrote: > > Some of Canon's digital cameras (I think a rather small sampling) > > have had some problems with front or back focusing. My first 300D > > had a definite back focusing problem. I finally proved it to the > > store who sold it to me, and they gave me another camera, which was > > right on the money. > > Lou, > Is there a specific method you know of to test for the focusing > problem above? If it is determined that this is an issue is the > only method to fix, a trip to the factory? I have a 10D that I have
> always thought had this issues but I have assumed that I would > sometimes use to shallow a DOF. > > Thanks, > Bruce Varner > http://mywebpages.comcast.net/btvarner/Bruce/photo.htm