Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: G7 Postscript  (Read 25069 times)
maxgruzen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


WWW
« Reply #40 on: November 13, 2006, 10:03:08 PM »
ReplyReply

JPEG Work Flow?  I've never worked with JPEG, just RAW so I"m not up on the work flow.  After import do I need to convert all JPEGS to TIFFS before I process in Lightroom so I don't degrade the files?  Look forward to having some fun with my new G7.
Logged
Ken Tanaka
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129



WWW
« Reply #41 on: November 14, 2006, 01:26:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
JPEG Work Flow?  I've never worked with JPEG, just RAW so I"m not up on the work flow.  After import do I need to convert all JPEGS to TIFFS before I process in Lightroom so I don't degrade the files?  Look forward to having some fun with my new G7.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85065\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Good question Max.  Indeed I, too, have spent so much time working with images that start in RAW format that it took me a bit of time to orient myself.

But basically I handle the G7 image files the same as RAW image files.  After copying from SD cards and renaming each file I import them into the Lightroom data base and assign keywords.  From that point the images just merge into the library.  Lightroom's Develop module handles them identically to RAW images, although 8-bit JPGs do not afford the generous adjustability that RAWs do.  Lightroom creates an intermediate TIF when you need to step out to CS2 (and choose the option to edit a copy of the file).  Saving your CS2 edits saves to the TIF (by default) which appears separately in the library.

Dealing with JPGs is really not much a detour at all in Lightroom.
Logged

Best Regards,
- Ken Tanaka -

www.KenTanaka.com
maxgruzen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


WWW
« Reply #42 on: November 14, 2006, 02:03:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ken Tanaka,Nov 13 2006, 11:26 PM
Good question Max.  Indeed I, too, have spent so much time working with images that start in RAW format that it took me a bit of time to orient myself.

But basically I handle the G7 image files the same as RAW image files.  After copying from SD cards and renaming each file I import them into the Lightroom data base and assign keywords.  From that point the images just merge into the library.  Lightroom's Develop module handles them identically to RAW images, although 8-bit JPGs do not afford the generous adjustability that RAWs do.  Lightroom creates an intermediate TIF when you need to step out to CS2 (and choose the option to edit a copy of the file).  Saving your CS2 edits saves to the TIF (by default) which appears separately in the library.

Dealing with JPGs is really not much a detour at all in Lightroom.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85084\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/qu          

Hi Ken, Yes I've discovered that CS2 converts the JPEGS to TIFFS in the edit in Photoshop option, but I've been doing it immediatley after importing from the card, and using the tiffs to do any PP. I remember reading years ago that every time you do something to a JPEG you degrade the file?? What's your feeling on this?  Do you know of any other way to convert from JPEG to TIFF in Lightroom other then the " edit in Photoshop " route?
Logged
jule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 738


WWW
« Reply #43 on: November 14, 2006, 02:41:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm in the market for something similar and spotted the LEICA D-LUX 3 which also sports a 10MP sensor.  It does have RAW for those interested :-) but lacks an optical view finder.  Seems like no one company can deliver the killer blow!

BTW, I'd love to see a head to head of these two cameras in real world shooting situations.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84868\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Interesting that there hasn't been much discussion about this camera since it was released at Photokina. Any reason why I wonder?
Julie
Logged

RedRebel
Guest
« Reply #44 on: November 14, 2006, 02:50:10 PM »
ReplyReply

I wonder what Canon's reaction is about our complaint that the G7 doesn't have rrrrRAW output?

Sometimes you simply want to travel light or want a low profile camera, just like not everyone is happy with these white Canon L series bazooka's.
Logged
Ken Tanaka
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129



WWW
« Reply #45 on: November 14, 2006, 03:16:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi Ken, Yes I've discovered that CS2 converts the JPEGS to TIFFS in the edit in Photoshop option, but I've been doing it immediatley after importing from the card, and using the tiffs to do any PP. I remember reading years ago that every time you do something to a JPEG you degrade the file?? What's your feeling on this?  Do you know of any other way to convert from JPEG to TIFF in Lightroom other then the " edit in Photoshop " route?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85209\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you select "Edit Original" CS2 will open the JPG in 8-bit mode.  If you select "Edit Copy" LightRoom will first create a TIF file in the library and CS2 will open this TIF in 16-bit mode.  (Not that you can recapture 16-bits of tonal depth from the 8-bit JPG.)  

If you take the "Edit Copy" route (which I recommend) stick with the TIF in your Library from that point forward.  The big issue with editing compressed JPGs is re-compressing them, which produces ever more compression "artifacts".
Logged

Best Regards,
- Ken Tanaka -

www.KenTanaka.com
jule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 738


WWW
« Reply #46 on: November 14, 2006, 03:18:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I wonder what Canon's reaction is about our complaint that the G7 doesn't have rrrrRAW output?

Sometimes you simply want to travel light or want a low profile camera, just like not everyone is happy with these white Canon L series bazooka's.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85222\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I asked a Canon rep and off the record he said.."Why would you buy a 400D if the G7 had RAW?"
Julie
Logged

opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #47 on: November 14, 2006, 03:40:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Did you know that if you hold the camera horizontally, it displays the time, but if you hold it vertically, it displays both the time and date? Why would someone do that?

To proof to Jan that camera sw really is more shoddy than airplane sw! :-)

Goodevening, ladies and gentleman. We're cruizin' along at about 30.000feet and expect to arrive at our destination in half an hour. Please fasten your seatbelt as we will have to make a sharp left so our GPS can sample the date...!?
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #48 on: November 14, 2006, 03:41:13 PM »
ReplyReply

To Ken and others:

How much of the time do you actually use the viewfinder, and how useful is it?
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #49 on: November 14, 2006, 03:44:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I asked a Canon rep and off the record he said.."Why would you buy a 400D if the G7 had RAW?"
Ask the same Canon rep, then:

"If that's the difference, why does the 400D offer an EF-S/EF mount?"

Quote
To proof to Jan that camera sw really is more shoddy than airplane sw! :-)

Goodevening, ladies and gentleman. We're cruizin' along at about 30.000feet and expect to arrive at our destination in half an hour. Please fasten your seatbelt as we will have to make a sharp left so our GPS can sample the date...!?


Okay, you win!
Logged

Jan
Ken Tanaka
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129



WWW
« Reply #50 on: November 14, 2006, 04:14:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
To Ken and others:

How much of the time do you actually use the viewfinder, and how useful is it?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85243\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've only used it once or twice.  With only 80% scene coverage (versus 100% for the lcd) and with no information or annunciation (beyond focus lock and slow shutter) it's not a particularly useful feature.
Logged

Best Regards,
- Ken Tanaka -

www.KenTanaka.com
image66
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 122


« Reply #51 on: November 14, 2006, 05:01:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've only used it once or twice.  With only 80% scene coverage (versus 100% for the lcd) and with no information or annunciation (beyond focus lock and slow shutter) it's not a particularly useful feature.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85257\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Which begs the question of why bother with the optical viewfinder?  If it has a barely usable 80% coverage and questionable alignment, it kind of defeats the purpose of having it in the first place.

At least electronic viewfinders are 100% accurate in coverage.

It's all part of the continual dumbing down of the product line.  Imagine having a rangefinder camera in the '60s with an 80% viewfinder of such poor quality.  How about an SLR in the '80s with as poor of a focus screen as we have in our DSLRs today?
Logged
maxgruzen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


WWW
« Reply #52 on: November 14, 2006, 05:27:56 PM »
ReplyReply

I would like to find a means to convert JPEGS to Tiffs in Lightrom without having them open in CS2. Anybody know how?
Logged
jule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 738


WWW
« Reply #53 on: November 14, 2006, 05:40:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ask the same Canon rep, then:

"If that's the difference, why does the 400D offer an EF-S/EF mount?"
Precisely the next question I asked. He said that  he thought Canon wanted an affordable entry level  digital SLR to then tempt the upgrades to better models and lenses. If there was a  'point and shoot' with fabulous quality AND RAW, consumers may not delve into the digital SLR market. He did clarify that it was only his opinion and not a policy outlined in particular by anyone else in Canon.
Julie
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad