ANOTHER question about RAW and JPG

[artandrevolution]

I'm an avid film user but just bought my 1st digital slr as well and i've been browsing through the various threads on the subject at hand.
I recently did a shoot where I shot in RAW format only. I have a Canon EOS Xti and the Canon Utility and zoombrowser EX software that i have been uploading my images to computor with.
The problem i'm having is that I only have Photoshop 7 which does not have a RAW format converter so i have to convert my images to JPG in the zoombrowser edit function. I think i have the ability to convert to TIFF format so would it be better to do that and THEN work in photoshop and mess with the images rather then convert to JPG then bring it up in photoshop?

and if anyone knows a free way to get photoshop CS2 (i pirated my 7) i'm interested as i'm dirt poor and it took me 6 months just to save for the camera.

[ericvision]

Better to go to TIFF first, you lose image quality every time you save a .jpg

Better not to mention p*rate software here. Not much difference between software copyright theft and image copyright theft, and I'm sure you'd be pissed off if Adobe nicked your images for their own use without paying

[artandrevolution]

only because adobe is a multi billion dollar corporation....
but thanks for verifying the TIFF thing.

[dharden]

http://www.photo-freeware.net/download_win-eng.php?id=414

Raw Shooter Essentials 2006 (now part of adobe but this is freeware)

Should do just what you need it to...

No point making a JPEG before a TIFF really (unless you want to do loads of editing and you're starting from a JPEG).

unfortunately you also have to do this:

1) Convert your .CR2 to .DNG: Download Adobe DNG converter 3.6 and convert the raw file of your Canon EOS XTi .CR2 to .DNG

2) Hack RawShooter.exe: Make sure to make a backup of your RawShooter.exe file then open the file using any Hex Editor. Find and replace each instance of ‘350D’ with ‘400D’1 and save it.
N.B:Make sure the new file has EXACTLY the same number of bytes as the original.

Well you’re pretty much done, just run the RawShooter.exe file you’ve just modified and it should be able to open all the .DNG files of your Canon EOS 400D.

Only drawback is that you won’t be able to open or edit file from a Canon EOS 350D / XT using this version of Rawshooter.exe, if you need to just use the original .exe file you’ve previously backed up, should work like a charm.

i found it on a website after a quick search....

HTH - bit long winded but probably worth it for free! DNG converter is also free as far as i know...

Dave

[dougj]

There are 2 RAW processors included with the XTi: ZoomBrowser (ZB) as you mentioned, and Digital Photographer Professional (DPP).

ZB provides some basic and reasonable RAW processing features, and the ability to automatically transfer the converted file to Photoshop.

DPP has similar capabilities to ZB, with a different interface and some processing differences.

There are differences between the 2, but IMO they are both good starting points for RAW processing. I suggest you experiment with both of them as they came with your camera and work well. You may want to adjust white balance and exposure / dynamic range, the rest as a starting point can be easily done in PS.

There are a number of resources available on the internet comparing TIF and JPG. From my perspective, I generally process in a 16 bit format in PS, but then convert and save to the application need.

The best possible printing is generally in TIF, if the printing system has the resolution and it is needed. Posting on the web requires nothing more than a relatively low resolution JPG file. There is a significant difference in file size. A 16 bit TIF processed from my 30D is about 50MB, while a reasonable JPG for web publishing is about 200KB.

I hope this helps and does not add confusion.

[dharden]

oops - didn't realise you got DPP with the XTi. in that case I think I'd be inclined to use that. you can send the image from DPP straight into photoshop as a TIFF can't you?

i prefer ACR but that's only any use if yove got CS or CS2 of course...

definitely 16 bit TIFF for landscapes you want to print. Adobe RGB colour space is only necessary if you've got extreme shades of yellow / green (& blue) to deal with (although that is pretty common for landscapes at least!). if not, use SRGB to minimise the risk of posterisation between shades - you get a fixed number of possible shades so if you use a smaller colour space they can have smaller gaps between them....

on the web, JPEG in sRGB.

[rsub8]

if anyone knows a free way to get photoshop CS2 (i pirated my 7) i'm interested as i'm dirt poor and it took me 6 months just to save for the camera.

only because adobe is a multi billion dollar corporation....

I cannot believe my eyes. Someone admits to stealing something and it's all but ignored. Do the other posters actually condone this? Is this really the kind of people hanging out at pbase?

I doubt that if someone admitted stealing someone else's photography, that it would be treated so lightly.

artandrevolution: have you tried writing to Adobe and asking them if there's a "free way" to get CS2? (And how is that a "technical question?")

I didn't know that being "dirt poor" justifies theft. And the gall to actually admit it? Do you really believe that this is OK? Shame on you.

I know this sort of solicitation must happen frequently at those "warez" sites, but never expected to find this sort of garbage here.

[rileypm]

I am poor and they are not, therefore it is OK to steal from them. That is an interesting moral value. I am better off than a lot of folks in my neighborhood so I guess it would be OK for my neighbors to steal from me. I don't think I like that.

[dougj]

The comments about the illegality of SW piracy are quite appropriate. Although rare, this does come up in the forums from time to time and several members have posted similar comments. Piracy is theft, there are no valid excuses or justifiable reasons.

I cannot believe my eyes. Someone admits to stealing something and it's all but ignored. Do the other posters actually condone this? Is this really the kind of people hanging out at pbase?

This is inappropriate and uncalled for. You are not in a position to challenge or accuse other members' beliefs based on their lack of comments.

[rsub8]

The comments about the illegality of SW piracy are quite appropriate. Although rare, this does come up in the forums from time to time and several members have posted similar comments. Piracy is theft, there are no valid excuses or justifiable reasons.

I cannot believe my eyes. Someone admits to stealing something and it's all but ignored. Do the other posters actually condone this? Is this really the kind of people hanging out at pbase?

This is inappropriate and uncalled for. You are not in a position to challenge or accuse other members' beliefs based on their lack of comments.

if anyone knows a free way to get photoshop CS2 (i pirated my 7) i'm interested as i'm dirt poor and it took me 6 months just to save for the camera.

only because adobe is a multi billion dollar corporation....

dougj, both of artandrevolution's statements quoted here were posted before your 28 Feb 2007 06:33 am post. Offering assistance to artandrevolution, while at the same time not challenging artandrevolution's admitted illegal activity, is the same as approving the latter.

[dougj]

Wrong again, you should note from my post the assistance provided related to software that came with the camera. The fact I did not choose to challange the pirated software question, and as it relates to me, is simply none of your business, and you are not in a position to judge me.

Take you personal attacks elsewhere.

[rsub8]

Offering assistance to artandrevolution, while at the same time not challenging artandrevolution's admitted illegal activity, is the same as approving the latter.

I repeat the above. You're way off base if it comes to trying to defend illegal activity.

[dougj]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. However you are neither qualified nor informed enough to sit in judgment of others for what someone did not post. You jumped to conclusions and cast dispersions on others, and this is simply wrong. There are better ways to communicate this.

[rsub8]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. However you are neither qualified nor informed enough to sit in judgment of others for what someone did not post. You jumped to conclusions and cast dispersions on others, and this is simply wrong. There are better ways to communicate this.

I think you mean cast aspersions, not dispersions. And what better ways are you thinking of? Who is judging whom here?

The comments about the illegality of SW piracy are quite appropriate. Although rare, this does come up in the forums from time to time and several members have posted similar comments. Piracy is theft, there are no valid excuses or justifiable reasons.

...

The fact I did not choose to challange the pirated software question, and as it relates to me, is simply none of your business

The legal term is estoppel. It's indefensible to say that you now consider that person's actions criminal while not criticizing that action previously.

As far as what someone "did not post," I still remain aghast that someone would tacitly assist an admitted criminal. Would you now agree that you don't condone artandrevolution's actions, which was my original point?

[dougj]

I am assisting someone in criminal activities by not posting?

Surely you jest and have clearly gone too far with this new accusation. I suggest you settle down and think about what you are posting, and the basis on which you making decisions and subsequent posts.