On Jul 19, 1:13=A0pm, "catf...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
<catf...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Kurt,
> make sure you have the latest camera raw plugin
>
> here is a link to camera raw candidate (beta)
4.5http://labs.adobe.com/wi=
ki/index.php/Camera_Raw_4.5
>
> and here is a link to camera raw
4.4.1http://www.adobe.com/products/photo=
shop/cameraraw.html
>
> "Kurt Knoll" <kkno...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >This is exactly the problem I have right now. My Photoshop CS will not
o=
pen
> >a raw file from my Canon Rebel XTIS Camera in Photoshop and I have
there=
fore
> >to us The Canon utility program that came with the camera first
converti=
ng
> >it to a tiff file and then use Photoshop to do further processing
there.
> >Kurt Knoll.
To me it seems that the real problem here is not so much the lack of a
visual reference, gray balance and pure hue targets, which we had
strapped on a drum in a viewing booth during trials, but with digital
it's the poor image quality that your stranded with upon the initial
conversion process regardless of the tools used. I realize we have the
ability to revert without destroying the original captured data,
yeeha! assuming you can recreate the good moves and compensate for the
bad decisions one initially made.
Today it's like your handed this shoe box full of crapola and forced
to pound the content into submission. I know the more you have to push
the more the image breaks down. This is a major step back in my head,
don't get me wrong, digital is the way to go but holy jesus! the
effort it takes to optimize and sharpen that raw data is painful. Now
if your divorced from the shoot itself like I am, your having to reach
inside the authors head and extrapolate from that "hi-end" digitally
captured data and target the vision and expectations of the artist.
Outside of hovering over the shoulder as they hit the button and
taking a mental picture, I'm still baffled by the tools and workflow.
KB
|
