Un-retouched photos - Galleries
wrote in message
ps.com...
It is my understanding that in any digital cameras, image processing
is made inside the camera using the image sensor processing engine.
In
some advanced digital cameras, they let the users keep the
unprocessed
photos (RAW files), instead of the JPG files (which had been
processed
by the camera).
My questions are as follows:
- what is the extension file for RAW ? (like .jpg in jpeg files)
Could this RAW files be viewed using any photo viewer software (as
they are, i.e. without interference or retouching from the
software?) . Or everytime you open the RAW files in a certain viewer
(like picasa, PSP, PS, etc), it is automatically semi-processed by
the
software before they are shwon on the screen.
- Do all or most available photo galleries in the websites contain
photos which have been modified or re-touched? How do you identify
gallery sites which contain photos that are NOT retouched? Are
there
such websites which only promote unretouched photos?
If I want to see how the various cameras compare in producing its
pictures, I consider the "inside" processing by the camera for the
first time is considered as original pictures (one chance for the
camera's processing engine to form the picture). However, I heard
that
some cameras now allow for re-touching while viewing in the camera.
It
is another manipulation addition, and I would not considered the
manipulated photos as original. I would be interested to know if
there is a way to find out that a JPEG file has been re-touched by a
software (PSP, PS, etc), or even if it has been retouched inside the
camera. Is there a way to find out?
I saw incredible portraiture photos in a number of the photo sharing
websites, and they have colourful, sharp photos. The ones that I
particularly like appeared to be taken using a D2X, D70 or D200. My
question is again, whether any manipulations are done on the photos.
Could someone show me similar kind of portraiture photos taken using
other brand name pro cameras (i.e. with similar rich colour and
razor
sharp images)?
On similar line of thought, I also saw photos which are presented by
camera reviewer websites - photos taken out of the box as part of
the
review of the camera. I assume these photos are nor manipulated
(other
than done inside the camera). Unfortunately, I can see that NONE
have
good, rich colour and sharpness that I like. Someone suggested that
it
is perhaps my computer monitor that needs adjustment. But, I am
seeing
the photos on the same computer. There are a contrasting difference
between these photos and the one I saw at photo galleries.
Thanks for info and discussion.
Why would anyone not enhance (retouch) an image to improve it if it
were possible to do so.
|