New E-10 owner, questions

Hi,

Like some of you i have switched from G-1 to E-10. Thanks to Diane B, who accept to answer personnaly to my questions. My first impression about the E-10 after 3 days ? I'm very pleased by the color rendition and lens resolution.
I have some questions for you:

With G-1 , general recommendations were to underexpose by 1/3 or 2/3 stop, shoot using RAW format, contrast and sharpness normal. What is the "standard" setting for the E-10 ?
RAW format don't seems to be popular among Exx users, why ?
Excuse me for my bad english ...--Regards, Pierre
Québec, Canada

RAW is only not the most popular because the 1:2.7 JPEGs are fantastic.

If you prefer post processing, the optimum setting (least camera manipulation) is LOW contrast and sharpness.

I leave mine on NORMAL and get great results - for day to day use. I set to LOW for pro work. I actually just set it to LOW yesterday and will shoot like that day to day for a while.

Welcome to E-10 land. Hope you enjoy it.

GageFX

Pierre Matte said:

Hi,
Like some of you i have switched from G-1 to E-10. Thanks to Diane
B, who accept to answer personnaly to my questions. My first
impression about the E-10 after 3 days ? I'm very pleased by the
color rendition and lens resolution.
I have some questions for you:
With G-1 , general recommendations were to underexpose by 1/3 or
2/3 stop, shoot using RAW format, contrast and sharpness normal.
What is the "standard" setting for the E-10 ?
RAW format don't seems to be popular among Exx users, why ?
Excuse me for my bad english ...
--
Regards, Pierre
Québec, Canada

Click to expand...

Pierre,

When using raw on the E-XX, the settings for contrast and sharpness make no difference. If shooting Jpegs, use low sharpness and low or normal contrast (This will require you to do sharpening in your post processing).

Check out the Paul Dempsey ORF tools at htp: www.dcnicholls.com/plugins/

E-10 RAW files are smaller than Tiff files, but they are still about 7.5mb in size. I can get about 34 Raw files on a 256mb card. The size, and post processing requirements are drawbacks.

As far as underexposing, if you blow out the highlights, the information is gone. If you underexpose, there is still info in the shadows which can be played with. So I guess its good practice to underexpose to preserve the highlights, or use the histogram to make sure your highlights aren't blown.

Sean

Pierre Matte said:

Hi,
Like some of you i have switched from G-1 to E-10. Thanks to Diane
B, who accept to answer personnaly to my questions. My first
impression about the E-10 after 3 days ? I'm very pleased by the
color rendition and lens resolution.
I have some questions for you:
With G-1 , general recommendations were to underexpose by 1/3 or
2/3 stop, shoot using RAW format, contrast and sharpness normal.
What is the "standard" setting for the E-10 ?
RAW format don't seems to be popular among Exx users, why ?
Excuse me for my bad english ...
--
Regards, Pierre
Québec, Canada

Click to expand...

Hi Pierre,

Welcome.....and I'm glad you're happy you made the switch.

As far as settings go, I think you'll find there is WIDE variation in what people use here. I'd suggest experimenting until you settle on what you feel works best for you.

I don't use RAW because of the file size and post processing time required, and because the camera gives excellent JPEG results (I use 1:4 compression....but many use 1:8 or 1:2.7).

After trying Low sharpening for a while, I switched back to Normal. I also use Normal contrast.

Enjoy your new camera......and post us a few pics when you can.

Best wishes,

David

Pierre:

I use RAW and 4:1 JPGs.

After logging in so many hours analyzing E10's output, I strongly suggest you consider the following "course" of action:

1. Try to always shoot at Sharpening LOW and wither LOW or NORMAL. The respective (LOW, NORMAL) combo seems to be an excellent tradeoff between noise, detail and color reproduction.

2. For everyday, casual shooting, shoot at 2.7:1 or 4:1 JPGs. I see not enough motivation to stick to 2.7:1 instead of 4:1. Differences are negligible. In fact, some jagged (artifacted) edges, deformed by compression, look even more sharper and jagged on 2.7-to-1s! So it is up to your evaluation.

3. Use RAW for MAX "power". Noise levels are substantially lower at all speeds. RAW is a terrific alternative for shooting for maximum quality and ISO 320, for instance. It also boasts the highest data transfer rate in the E10's CF interface (around 620 Kbytes/sec). Please remember that a 512 MB card or above will be required (you can fit 66 RAW pics in one). Furthermore, you will need to import them via Photoshop, one by one, and a fast PC will help a lot. I think this is the main reason why RAW is not that popular: it requires you to be on top of your PC, and it takes time away.

Furthermore, when shooting RAW, please remember that you will depend on your 4-shots on-board E10 buffer for survival between on shoot and the other. If your work/shooting habits require faster response times, you are going to have to stick to .JPGs (tears...).

A vis-a-vis .JPGs versus RAW visual comparo:

http://www.pbase.com/feharmat/ultraiso_320

Best regards,

Ferenc

Pierre Matte said:

Hi,
Like some of you i have switched from G-1 to E-10. Thanks to Diane
B, who accept to answer personnaly to my questions. My first
impression about the E-10 after 3 days ? I'm very pleased by the
color rendition and lens resolution.
I have some questions for you:
With G-1 , general recommendations were to underexpose by 1/3 or
2/3 stop, shoot using RAW format, contrast and sharpness normal.
What is the "standard" setting for the E-10 ?
RAW format don't seems to be popular among Exx users, why ?
Excuse me for my bad english ...
--
Regards, Pierre
Québec, Canada

Click to expand...

Ferenc wrote:
Furthermore, you will

Ferenc said:

need to import them via Photoshop, one by one, and a fast PC will
help a lot. I think this is the main reason why RAW is not that
popular: it requires you to be on top of your PC, and it takes time
away.

Click to expand...

Ferenc, I have only shot once in RAW with the E10 but always shot in RAW with my Canon G1. I'm wondering if its possible to just copy all the RAWs from my card to my harddrive and converting them later with PS? That's what I always did with the Canon and then used Breezebrowser to convert--and sometimes batch convert to tiff. Since I know I have to convert 1 by 1 in PS, then I will pick my shoots to use RAW, but didn't see any reason I couldn't copy the files, free up my CF cards and move on.

Cheers, Diane--Diane B http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleriesB/W lover, but color is seducing me

Diane B said:

I'm wondering if its possible to just
copy all the RAWs from my card to my harddrive and converting them
later with PS?

Click to expand...

Yes, transfer to hard drive then convert. I don't know if there is a good batch method for conversion. Yet.

I find converting that RAW files is a bit of pain. The PS plugin is slow and I don't always get consistant results from ORF Suite. For browsing, the Camedia software is great, but I don't trust it with actual image manipulation. Waiting to see how Bibble is.

Also, when you take with RAW you can only view a thumbnail on camera. I sometimes like to see the details of a shot to see if I need to reshoot. Occasionally hand shake is not visible until you magnify 3 or 4 times.

All of that being said, in the last week I've changed over to RAW. I think the results are worth it. The images are quite a bit cleaner. I just got a 20 GB digital wallet, so I'm not too worried about size issues.

Salut le francophone de la bande!!!!!

Cela fait plaisir!
J'ai eu un E10 et j'ai maintenant un E20

J'ai toujours sous exposé d'un tiers de diaphragme (plus souvent encore de 1, de deux...)
Pour moi le standard, c'est donc -1/3 stop
Bienvenue au club!

Si tu veux vois quelques centaines de photos faites à l'E10.... http://www.jaco.be.tf
ton avis m'intéresse
Tu vas voir l'E10 est une fromadable machine!
" Je vous ai compris"!
Jaco de Belgique (ça change de Jaco from Belgium...)
Amitiés

PS si tu veux me répondre en français, fais le sur mon adresse mail plutôt qu'ici...

Pierre Matte said:

Hi,
Like some of you i have switched from G-1 to E-10. Thanks to Diane
B, who accept to answer personnaly to my questions. My first
impression about the E-10 after 3 days ? I'm very pleased by the
color rendition and lens resolution.
I have some questions for you:
With G-1 , general recommendations were to underexpose by 1/3 or
2/3 stop, shoot using RAW format, contrast and sharpness normal.
What is the "standard" setting for the E-10 ?
RAW format don't seems to be popular among Exx users, why ?
Excuse me for my bad english ...
--
Regards, Pierre
Québec, Canada

Click to expand...

--Jaco-BelgiumDigital http://www.jaco.be.tf

TrentMcD said:

Diane B said:

I'm wondering if its possible to just
copy all the RAWs from my card to my harddrive and converting them
later with PS?

Click to expand...

Yes, transfer to hard drive then convert. I don't know if there is
a good batch method for conversion. Yet.

I find converting that RAW files is a bit of pain. The PS plugin
is slow and I don't always get consistant results from ORF Suite.
For browsing, the Camedia software is great, but I don't trust it
with actual image manipulation. Waiting to see how Bibble is.

Also, when you take with RAW you can only view a thumbnail on
camera. I sometimes like to see the details of a shot to see if I
need to reshoot. Occasionally hand shake is not visible until you
magnify 3 or 4 times.

All of that being said, in the last week I've changed over to RAW.
I think the results are worth it. The images are quite a bit
cleaner. I just got a 20 GB digital wallet, so I'm not too worried
about size issues.

Click to expand...

Thanks Trent. I might be concerned about not being able to review, but I do know that I love shooting in RAW with the Canon. I am planning to buy a notebook relatively soon (with CD-RW) so size won't be an issue either--plus I do have quite a bit of memory as it is.

Guess I'll try it and see. The few RAWs I shot I used ORF suite--I was a little bit not sure of the results. I hope Bibble is good--there is a nice little Canon converter--Breezebrowser--that makes RAW easy, fast.

Cheers, Diane--Diane B http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleriesB/W lover, but color is seducing me

I too am a new owner (E-20) Is there a significant difference in post-processing time between a tif and a raw in photoshop? Which one do you feel represents the best balance between quality/practicality? Actually any pointers on tools/techniques for optimizing quality are welcome. I am familiar with levels, but not sure how to reduce noise and sharpen correctly!
Thanks!

SeanU said:

When using raw on the E-XX, the settings for contrast and sharpness
make no difference. If shooting Jpegs, use low sharpness and low or
normal contrast (This will require you to do sharpening in your
post processing).

Check out the Paul Dempsey ORF tools at
htp: www.dcnicholls.com/plugins/

E-10 RAW files are smaller than Tiff files, but they are still
about 7.5mb in size. I can get about 34 Raw files on a 256mb card.
The size, and post processing requirements are drawbacks.

As far as underexposing, if you blow out the highlights, the
information is gone. If you underexpose, there is still info in the
shadows which can be played with. So I guess its good practice to
underexpose to preserve the highlights, or use the histogram to
make sure your highlights aren't blown.

Sean

Pierre Matte said:

Hi,
Like some of you i have switched from G-1 to E-10. Thanks to Diane
B, who accept to answer personnaly to my questions. My first
impression about the E-10 after 3 days ? I'm very pleased by the
color rendition and lens resolution.
I have some questions for you:
With G-1 , general recommendations were to underexpose by 1/3 or
2/3 stop, shoot using RAW format, contrast and sharpness normal.
What is the "standard" setting for the E-10 ?
RAW format don't seems to be popular among Exx users, why ?
Excuse me for my bad english ...
--
Regards, Pierre
Québec, Canada

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

A couple of quick points. I'm sure somebody here who has more experience can fill you in better.

The problem using RAW in PS, as far as time goes, is the conversion. I have an older computer (PIII 600, 512 MB RAM). It takes 45 seconds to convert RAW in PS. The other utilities are much faster, but I like PS better.

Once you do the conversion, you are limited to what you can do. Levels, curves and unsharpen mask are all available, but layers and masks aren't. If you need these, you must convert to 8 bit. This is actually painless and simple.

Use unsharpen mask instead of sharpen to sharpen. I usually zoom in to 66% or 100% so I can see the actual effects and toggle between preview on and off.

Somebody recently posted the suggestion to convert the image to LAB and sharpen the lightness channel. I've tried it and the results do seem better.

There are quite a few threads about noise, so I'll leave that alone. For the most part, however, particularly when I'm shooting in RAW, noise doesn't bother me.

Hope this helps.

The main downside of Raw over JPEG is the file size and conversion. The upside is the improvement in noise levels. The noise seems come in part from the jpeg compression and the in-camera sharpening. Also, as TrenMcD mentioned, you get 2 extra bits of info to work with in levels and curves which gives you more flexibility than letting the camera decide which info gets discarded when the conversion to 8bits happens.

Shoot a few shots in both Raw and Jpeg 2.7 (vary the subject a little) and see if you can tell the difference. If you can't see a difference, use Jpeg.

Sean

TrentMcD said:

A couple of quick points. I'm sure somebody here who has more
experience can fill you in better.

The problem using RAW in PS, as far as time goes, is the
conversion. I have an older computer (PIII 600, 512 MB RAM). It
takes 45 seconds to convert RAW in PS. The other utilities are
much faster, but I like PS better.

Once you do the conversion, you are limited to what you can do.
Levels, curves and unsharpen mask are all available, but layers and
masks aren't. If you need these, you must convert to 8 bit. This
is actually painless and simple.

Use unsharpen mask instead of sharpen to sharpen. I usually zoom
in to 66% or 100% so I can see the actual effects and toggle
between preview on and off.

Somebody recently posted the suggestion to convert the image to LAB
and sharpen the lightness channel. I've tried it and the results
do seem better.

There are quite a few threads about noise, so I'll leave that
alone. For the most part, however, particularly when I'm shooting
in RAW, noise doesn't bother me.

Hope this helps.

Click to expand...