If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
contrast and saturation in camera or software
Does it make any difference if I adjust the contrast and saturation in the
camera settings or with software afterwards? If I don't like the results from camera settings, can they basically be reversed with software without getting any artifacts? TIA. mike |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
If you have the choice, do it yourself. Once done within the camera, it
cannot be reversed and some tones will be lost forever. At least if you do it yourself, you can keep the original file unedited. That's why the output from semi-professional dslr looks rather dull and flat compared to a popular "amateur" model - no enhancement. "mike regish" wrote in message ... Does it make any difference if I adjust the contrast and saturation in the camera settings or with software afterwards? If I don't like the results from camera settings, can they basically be reversed with software without getting any artifacts? TIA. mike |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
mike regish wrote:
Does it make any difference if I adjust the contrast and saturation in the camera settings or with software afterwards? If I don't like the results from camera settings, can they basically be reversed with software without getting any artifacts? If you record RAW, then you can do whatever is needed after the fact. I don't believe contrast and saturation are reversible, at least at the extremes. I believe sharpness is reversible if you know how the sharp algo in the camera is set. In any case, the monitors on the camera are far too small to do any useful judgement of where these setting should be, IMO. Cheers, Alan -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:49:40 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote: I believe sharpness is reversible if you know how the sharp algo in the camera is set. Nope. Sharpening is always irreversible. -- Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215 Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing. --Josh Micah Marshall |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
If you have the choice, do it yourself. Once done within the camera, it
cannot be reversed and some tones will be lost forever. At least if you do it yourself, you can keep the original file unedited. Exactly. Doing otherwise is like throwing the negative away after making the first print. -- Mark Lauter Photos, Ideas & Opinions http://www.marklauter.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ben Rosengart wrote:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:49:40 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: I believe sharpness is reversible if you know how the sharp algo in the camera is set. Nope. Sharpening is always irreversible. Why ? -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:56:16 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote: Ben Rosengart wrote: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:49:40 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: I believe sharpness is reversible if you know how the sharp algo in the camera is set. Nope. Sharpening is always irreversible. Why ? To be honest, I can't readily explain why the process is irreversible, though it's obvious to me from the description of the algorithm on Luminous Landscape. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...ding-usm.shtml I can say that it discards information, but that's just restating the same thing in different words, and I won't insult your intelligence. Do you understand how sharpening works? -- Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215 Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing. --Josh Micah Marshall |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ben Rosengart wrote:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:56:16 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: Ben Rosengart wrote: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:49:40 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: I believe sharpness is reversible if you know how the sharp algo in the camera is set. Nope. Sharpening is always irreversible. Why ? To be honest, I can't readily explain why the process is irreversible, though it's obvious to me from the description of the algorithm on Luminous Landscape. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...ding-usm.shtml I can say that it discards information, but that's just restating the same thing in different words, and I won't insult your intelligence. Do you understand how sharpening works? I have three (at least) sharpenning algorithms on two programs on my PC. For one of them, there is a 5*5 matrix of weights used when the matrix is passed over [I * F = I'] the image. Since on successive iterations of the filter (which I assume advances by 1 pixel at a time) would have a specific effect, then performing a reverse order pass with the filter set to F^-1 should result in the blurred back to orig. image. I think (eg: I'm not sure that information is discarded). Having said that, and not having simulated what I say above to verify it, and in no mood at all to try, I can't state whether it is so or not. Regarding USM filters (a la photoshop) which is what I use, I would not be surprised if it were not reversible due solely to the 'threshold' setting. From a USM'd image it would be impossible to determine which pixels were the result of a threshold that had been passed or not. I have no idea which algo. is in a camera, but I would guess it is similar to the first one I described as it is computationally light. Cheers, Alan -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
mike regish wrote:
Does it make any difference if I adjust the contrast and saturation in the camera settings or with software afterwards? If I don't like the results from camera settings, can they basically be reversed with software without getting any artifacts? No you cannot reverse these without loss of information but I believe it is best to let the camera do the adjustments if they are the appropriate adjustments because the camera should be using the raw data. If the scene is already too saturated, too contrasty or too noisy for sharpening, then it's better to turn that stuff off & do it yourself because highlights will be blown irretrievably, colors posterized, etc. I'm assuming RAW isn't an option for your camera or you don't have the energy to go through that for all shots. If you had the option to shoot RAW + high quality jpeg, you could probably ignore the RAW for most shots & use the jpeg. I would definitely boost the settings in that case. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Alan Browne wrote: I believe sharpness is reversible if you know how the sharp algo in the camera is set. Not true, in general. Plus, of course, if you're taking processed output from the camera, you've probably thrown away all the extra precision in the raw file. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
contrast and saturation in camera or software | mike regish | Digital Photography | 11 | April 12th 05 11:58 PM |
Brightness & Contrast vs. Brightness, Hue & Saturation. | Mark A Framness | Digital Photography | 0 | January 25th 05 02:42 PM |
Brightness & Contrast vs. Brightness, Hue & Saturation. | Mark A Framness | Digital Photography | 0 | January 25th 05 02:42 PM |
substituting lighting changes for software edit | David Virgil Hobbs | Digital Photography | 2 | November 18th 04 06:31 PM |
increased color saturation solves hyper-contrast problems | David Virgil Hobbs | Digital Photography | 1 | October 26th 04 12:23 PM |