Photo(!): RAW processing

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Paul Saunders said:

Thanks Carol, I'll take a closer look at this. The ability to compare
up to four images simultaneously would be very useful to me.

I also noticed this interesting sounding feature;

"Improved highlight detail with combined raw conversion .
BreezeBrowser Pro's unique combined conversion combines the excellent
colors of normal conversion with a second raw conversion optimized
for highlight detail."

Downloading the trial version now.

That's the Pro version, to be clear.

I'd be interested to know what you think.

I upgraded yesterday to the Pro version and have been tentatively
experimenting with it today. If anyone is interested the trial version is
fully functional for 15 days. It does limit the number of files in a folder
you can work on, and watermarks any files it produces but at least you can
play and see what it can do.

One good thing is that BreezeSystems are constantly working on their
products and regularly release updates and enhancements to their products.
One thing I started experimenting with today is the HTML generator. This is
fully extendable and produces web galleries/slide shows/CD photo packages
and other customised output. You can produce your own templates, download
extras from the Breeze website and there are some good 3rd party ones to
download from http://www.peterberger.at/start_e.html I especially like Peter
Berger's 'filmstrip' template.

The 'Download Pro' product (which you can buy as part of a bundle) is also
worth having as it lets you grab files from your camera/cards (and even hard
disc folders), organise them and even eliminate duplicates (the bane of my
hard disc's life). It also functions within Breeze Browser.

For me ACDSee has come to the end of its useful life. I have been using the
'power pack' version since version 3 and recently upgraded to version 7. The
rendering of Canon 300D RAW files is truly awful (completely cahnged
colours) and their tech support are simply not interested. I have also found
every version of their software buggy and unpredictable.

From now on I am using a combination of BreezeBrowser, IrfanView
(occasionally) and PhotoShop 7. I am also experimenting with PhotoShop
Album, but I get the feeling it has a little too much emphasis on the user
interface and not enough on efficiency and stability.

FWIW I'm not sure but I think PhotoShop Elements 3 has RAW file support ???
If so that may be a cheap and useful way to go for anyone who isn't already
set up and doesn't want to take out a mortgage on the full PhotoShop CS
package.

--
Carol Haynes
Reply address is set to vaporize - don't expect a reply!

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I wasn't sure if DPP came with the 300D or not (so it might be free or
possibly not), but I did check the 300D downloads on the Canon website and
the 1.5 update (i.e., probably not the full version, but why list it there
if it wasn't included?!?) was listed at number 36:
http://software.canon-europe.com/Cameras/SLR_Cameras/EOS_300D10037.asp My
version of DPP was contained in a black wallet, on a seperate CD to the EOS
Digital Solutions CD.

It is the full version, and only seeks existence of any Canon software
that came with the 300D to allow it to install as an 'upgrade'

--
Darren
mail to darren not ng

"Darren G" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
| In article <[email hidden]>,
| [email hidden] says...
| >
|
| >
| >
| > I wasn't sure if DPP came with the 300D or not (so it might be free or
| > possibly not), but I did check the 300D downloads on the Canon website
and
| > the 1.5 update (i.e., probably not the full version, but why list it
there
| > if it wasn't included?!?) was listed at number 36:
| > http://software.canon-europe.com/Cameras/SLR_Cameras/EOS_300D10037.asp
My
| > version of DPP was contained in a black wallet, on a seperate CD to the
EOS
| > Digital Solutions CD.
| >
| It is the full version, and only seeks existence of any Canon software
| that came with the 300D to allow it to install as an 'upgrade'
|
| --
| Darren

Well I'm glad it worked okay. If nothing else, it's free, so must certainly
be worth a look before you spend any money on Photoshop or C1. Also
included with my 20D was Photoshop Elements 2 - on a budget (if I never
already had Photoshop CS), combined with DPP, that would do me.

Saying that, I personally can't wait to try C1 when the PC version supports
the 20D, as I've heard so many good things about.

Ste

"Chris Townsend" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
| In message <[email hidden]>, ste®
| <[email hidden]> writes
| >
| >"Darren G" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
| >news:[email hidden]...
| >
| ><snip>
| >
| >| 2. software to use to process the RAWs (preferably without incurring
| >| cost). Using the Canon software works... to a fashion, but it is
clunky
| >| to use and the previews are very slow to refresh, making it hard to
| >| compare the effect of changes 'before & after'. And on first glances
it
| >| doesn't seem to do batch work.
| >|
| >| Cheers
| >|
| >| --
| >| Darren
| >
| >
| >I've got a 20D, and it came with Canon Digital Photo Professional (DPP),
| >which I assume also comes with the 300D?
|
| It may do now. When I bought my 300D it came with Canon File Viewer
| Utility and ZoomBrowser EX/Photo Record, which really aren't very good.

Yes, I agree, they are rubbish. I now use a card reader to transfer images
from my camera, so avoiding the file viewer utility completely. So I was
surprised that DPP was quite good - certainly a step in the right direction
after previous offerings I've experienced from Canon and Fuji.

Ste

In the new manuscript <[email hidden]>,
Darren G penned the following script...
<snip>

Personal workflow:

Use Photoshop CS to manage the RAW files, and convert the relevant file
to a PSD format.
Edit and process in 16 bit (if for print) or 8bit for Web.
Output as either a PSD for print or jpg for web. Sharpen for media, i.e.
screen, inkjet or lab as the last step.

Print using QImage to a Canon i965 soon to be a Kodak 1400. QImage can
be found here:

http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/

The quality of the QImage output has to be seen to be believed, and the
support is excellent. It's got a quirky interface but once you figure it
out it's fast and efficient.

Once images are processed I keep the PSD/RAW files in a DVD archive and
a external HD.

As mentioned never delete RAW files, you may consider converting to the
newer Adobe open format (DNG) however support for this standard is in
the early days.

One set of backups are kept at a friends house, and the remaining 2 on
site in different parts of the house. All images are catalogued using
Photoshop CS. Archival can also be done using this software:

http://www.pictureflow.com/products/archive_creator/index.html

Remember to store Optical media in a cool dark storage area. Not cold,
cool. Also make sure it's free from moisture as well. This will help in
keeping the media from breaking down. Also get the premium archival
DVD/CDs as they are rated for a long life rather than a couple of years.
also consider magnetic stores (External HD/DAT drive) as these are more
likely to succeed Optical disks.

Get into a work flow of having meaningful folder names like:

Date - location - purpose

Or some such way, each person has a method that suits them. Stick to it,
as you will never get round to converting the old folders one you shift
to another method ;o)
--
One man, One Camera and a Demented Vision:

www.CelticShadows.co.uk

In the new manuscript <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
penned the following script...

Quoted message said:

I particularly hate Canon's habit of not including lens hoods with their
lenses.

All my L series lenses have come with hoods and storage bags/cases as
standard?

Also my 28-135 also came with a hood....
--
One man, One Camera and a Demented Vision:

www.CelticShadows.co.uk

"Chris Street" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
| On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 00:14:34 -0000, ste® wrote:
|
| > "Darren G" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
| > news:[email hidden]...
| >
| > <snip>
| >
| >| 2. software to use to process the RAWs (preferably without incurring
| >| cost). Using the Canon software works... to a fashion, but it is
clunky
| >| to use and the previews are very slow to refresh, making it hard to
| >| compare the effect of changes 'before & after'. And on first glances
it
| >| doesn't seem to do batch work.
| >|
| >| Cheers
| >|
| >| --
| >| Darren
| >
| >
| > I've got a 20D, and it came with Canon Digital Photo Professional (DPP),
| > which I assume also comes with the 300D? I never even bothered
installing
| > it because I always assumed the manufacturer's software was rubbish, and
I
| > also assumed that the EOS File Viewer utility was the RAW converter
(which
| > it isn't)! ...That is, until a friend recommended DPP.
| >
|
| Having just splashed out on a 20D myself I'm also working through the same
| process. One thing that did disappoint me immencsly was that the
| instructions for DPP are on the CD as PDF files. I agree that for a cheapo
| network card this would be fine, but for a £1000+ camera system it leaves
a
| nasty feeling of penny pinching in the extreme.

Hope you're enjoying your 20D Chris. Yes, I hate reading through PDF
manuals (nothing beats having a piece of paper in the hand), but I found
that the website tutorial videos were quite good as an alternative:
http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/dpp/index.html

Ste

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
| ste® wrote:
|
| > I've got a 20D, and it came with Canon Digital Photo Professional
| > (DPP), which I assume also comes with the 300D?
|
| No, it didn't, although it may now.
|
| > Best of all, it's free!
|
| I assume the "update" is the full version? I've downloaded it, I'll
| give it a try.
|
| Paul

Yes, Darren confirms that it is. Hope you find it okay. I had a few bugs
in the Photoshop CS RAW Converter, but I think this was due to it being the
beta version (so not 100% supporting the 20D, and was making a nasty mess of
one or two images out of 100).

However, I've had good results with DPP, and my friend (a pro photographer)
told me the same. As you do a small amount of work at the RAW stage (before
converting to 16 bit TIF), I'm sure it would do a good job for you.

Ste

Faolan said:

Quoted message said:

I particularly hate Canon's habit of not including lens hoods with
their lenses.

All my L series lenses have come with hoods and storage bags/cases as
standard?

L yes, others no. And it's not like every non L lens is a cheapie.

Quoted message said:

Also my 28-135 also came with a hood....

If that's not an L then that's strange, I read that none of the non L
lenses come with hoods.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

ste® said:

Yes, Darren confirms that it is. Hope you find it okay.

Ta.

Quoted message said:

However, I've had good results with DPP, and my friend (a pro
photographer) told me the same. As you do a small amount of work at
the RAW stage (before converting to 16 bit TIF), I'm sure it would do
a good job for you.

I rarely do any work at the RAW stage, but when I do I prefer to do it
in Photoshop. It may be better for my batch JPEG conversion though.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

In the new manuscript <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
penned the following script...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Also my 28-135 also came with a hood....

If that's not an L then that's strange, I read that none of the non L
lenses come with hoods.

Probably lucky as it was in a separate box unlike my L series lenses.
The 85 1.8 hood fits the 35 F2 with no vignetting on a 10D but it cost
me £10 any so I wasn't too fussed. Probably be an issue on the 1D Mk2...

Suprisingly I don't use the hood on the 28-135 as it makes it a bit
unwieldy and kind defeats the objective of a walk around lens.
--
I see great shots, but the voices worry me...

www.CelticShadows.co.uk

In the new manuscript <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
penned the following script...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Also my 28-135 also came with a hood....

If that's not an L then that's strange, I read that none of the non L
lenses come with hoods.

Probably lucky as it was in a separate box unlike my L series lenses.
The 85 1.8 hood fits the 35 F2 with no vignetting on a 10D but it cost
me £10 any so I wasn't too fussed. Probably be an issue on the 1D Mk2...

Suprisingly I don't use the hood on the 28-135 as it makes it a bit
unwieldy and kind defeats the objective of a walk around lens.
--
I see great shots, but the voices worry me...

www.CelticShadows.co.uk

In article <[email hidden]>, Faolan
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Also my 28-135 also came with a hood..

So did mine but the 10 - 22mm doesn't - mean b******s
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Also my 28-135 also came with a hood....

If that's not an L then that's strange, I read that none of the non L
lenses come with hoods.

Mine's an EF USM -IS
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk