RAW vs White balance

Started Nov 20, 2006 | Discussions thread
CurtisR Regular Member • Posts: 263
Gordon, you're wrong on a critical point

GordonBGood wrote:

Yes, for the D cameras that has been observed several times, and I
think I saw some similar results posted for the K100D. However,
whether you do the conversion yourself in raw or use the camera
settings won't make any difference to the final result. Since the
lost bits are pretty much below the noise floor, there won't be
anything significant lost in the way of Dynamic Range and as for
banding, even if one could notice these gaps in tonality, they will
pretty will be filled in by the dithering effect of further
processing.

The bits lost by using ISO3200 instead of 800 are the Most Significant Bits - representing the brightest parts of the image. You are clipping highlights, not chopping noise into blackness. Shooting in ISO 800 instead of 3200 gives you the same low-intensity data, but doesn't throw away two stops of high-intensity data. (Though the jpg conversion, and the tone curve that the camera uses to do this conversion tends to throw away a lot of shadow detail, but this is regardless of the camera's sensitivity setting - it's just the nature of jpg vs. raw. You'd need to show some proof to make me believe that all the bits thrown away in this fashion are below the noise floor in all cases.)

Regards, GordonBGood

Just keepin' it real.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
w
w
w
ddd
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow