30D Question

scoff

scoff

Messages
1,014
Edit My Images
Yes
Does anyone use the picture style settings?
wondered if there is some obvious use that I'm missing?

It would appear that I can adjust everythig in PS rather than have it come out of the camera preset.

Can I go backwards with the settings once I've taken a picture?

TIA
 
Well they only work with jpegs, but they're quite handy actually, producing nice results usually. My 1DMK2N has the same option - I don't have a 30D.

I suppose you could correct most of the settings in processing if you didn't like them, with the exception of sharpening probably, which would be tricky.
 
Actually, I too was under the impression that it only worked with JPEGs.

However, upon chatting with Janice, she did some reading and they affect a RAW shot too.

I have reset mine to "Natural/Faithful" which I found gives the best reproduction, rather than the default.
 
Hmm. It's interesting. I've just done the obvious test and selected 'Monochrome' out of the 'Picture Style' options, then a shot a RAW test shot. On the 1D LCD screen the shot appears in Mono, which I must admit surprised me a bit.

On opening the shot in RSP, the thumbnail appears briefly as mono while the file is loading, then reverts to colour, which makes me think that RSP is discarding the info, which is what you would expect with a RAW file.

I can't really see the value of these 'Picture Style' settings when compared to the enormous adjustment options RAW gives you, and everything I've read has led me to believe they're provided for quick and convenient jpegs straight out of the camera?

If anyone has more info on this then I'm all ears. :)
 
CT said:
Hmm. It's interesting. I've just done the obvious test and selected 'Monochrome' out of the 'Picture Style' options, then a shot a RAW test shot. On the 1D LCD screen the shot appears in Mono, which I must admit surprised me a bit.

On opening the shot in RSP, the thumbnail appears briefly as mono while the file is loading, then reverts to colour, which makes me think that RSP is discarding the info, which is what you would expect with a RAW file.

I can't really see the value of these 'Picture Style' settings when compared to the enormous adjustment options RAW gives you, and everything I've read has led me to believe they're provided for quick and convenient jpegs straight out of the camera?

If anyone has more info on this then I'm all ears. :)
Click to expand...

Totally agree CT, same thing happend to me. The RAW files were B&W on the LCD but the images when loaded in DPP were colour and the jpegs were B&W on both the LCD and the monitor :thinking: I'm too all ears :)
 
Was more directing this towards JPEG I guess, as it hardly seems worth imposing a setting on a RAW imgae when it can be reversed or it can actually detract from the image?

Will have a play with the natural setting for JPEG.
 
The picture style details are saved in the raw file EXIF and so when you load them into DPP (and presumably other raw processors) all the settings are applied to match those styles by default.

They have no effect on the actual raw image data though, and you can switch between different styles in DPP which will show you what the camera would have produced.

If you are shooting in JPG only then, as always, you are better off trying to get things right straight out of the camera. Not only is it quicker in post production, but while you can change an image in PS you always risk losing detail doing things this way. Remember the camera applies the picture style to the 12-bit raw data, if you 'apply' a style in Photoshop it will be to an 8-bit lossy conversion.

Michael.
 
That's my understanding Michael. Certain info while not processed with the file is saved alongside the file as a sort of Postit note if you will. I don't use DPP, and as far as I can see the only option RSP gives to select 'In camera' settings is white balance.
 
Ahhh so technically we were both right?

While they do make a difference, it is certainly a changeable difference, as the original RAW file isnt edited at all.
 
All depending on which RAW processor you use it seems. :)
 
Just on a side note, I was informed that if you save a JPEG as a TIF this is lossless as far as quality is concerned.
Where as each time a JPEG is saved "some" quality is lost.
So if you are doing lots of processing on an image save as a Tif first
 
Thats correct mate.

When you save a JPEG, it strips out all unnecessary information to basically compress the image.
When you save a TIF, it saves it all, warts n all, hence the rather large file size.

The only time I save a JPEG now is my final web sized versions. Everything else I keep as layered TIFFS. Sure the file sizes may be large, but storage space is cheap nowadays, and I have peace of mind knowing I can always go back and edit anything I've done to a photo in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top