I've recently loaded in a firmware enhancement to my Canon S2 IS, that allows for lots of new features in the camera.The firmware program is open-source and called CHDK (you can read lots about it here) and works on a lot of Canon P&S cameras.
Amazingly, it just resides on a memory card, and doesn't actually change the camera's firmware, so it's completely benign in terms of safety. Some of the coolest features are :
-- live histogram (in 7 different modes, including by color or luminance or several combos)
-- RAW capture
-- battery meter by percent or voltage
It's actually very cool, and has been fun to play with - I'm amazed that more of these features aren't provided by the manufacturers themselves.
But that brings me to my second question/problem; I've been working a little on RAW conversions (which I've never done before). I'm shooting in RAW+JPG, so I have the JPG as a reference, and I have to say that in general, the JPG always looks better color/tone wise. In the example I've posted here, the shot on the left is the JPG, and the right is the RAW conversion (CRW->DNG->JPG, since I couldn't get ACR in PS Elements 4 to open the CRW's the firmware creates).
The thing I'm most concerned with, and have a problem with, is the color of the guitar itself....the outer red rim and the way it blends toward the middle looks MUCH better and more ture to life to me in the JPG version. Any idea what's going on with the RAW conversion?
It's possible that I'm just getting crappy or pseudo RAW files, but I'm hoping it's something I'm doing wrong in ACR. I've tried quite a few settings and white balances, and no matter how much the back wall and couch look the same between the images, the guitar always seem funky.
That 'hack' sounds like a great upgrade for your camera.
ACR uses two different profiles for each camera that it supports in order to handle colors correctly. ACR doesn't support the S2, which may be why the orange and red looks so funky here.
Normally, this isn't a big problem because ACR in CS3 has a Hue, Saturation, Luminance panel that targets 8 different colors (incl. orange and red) and which would make short work in getting the guitar body back to the colors that the S2 converted and produced for the JPEG file. Unfortunately, Elements 4 uses a truncated version of ACR which doesn't have that feature.
You could always select the body in Elements after your RAW conversion and then use a Hue/Saturation adjustment layer to non-destructively alter the colors.
Or you can try the full featured (and free!) RAWTherapee converter, which I'm pretty sure supports DNG files and has a lot more control over the conversion than does ACR in E4. RT may render those colors more to your liking.
John - Thanks so much for the RAW Therapee advice. Much much better than ACR, and it can read the CRW files my camera spits out (so no need to convert to DNG, unless I want a more generic file as backup). Seems like a very very nice program too - I'm curious how it stacks up against full ACR, or any of the other big name converters.
Now my biggest problem is that I'm used to starting with a JPG that's pretty realistic, and now I'm trying to start with a RAW file that has a lot more latitude and possible interpretations. It's a little overwhelming...
You're welcome, David. Glad to hear you're having success using RT.
I started using RAW Therapee when I found ACR in PS CS lacking, but abandoned it after upgrading to CS3, with a much more robust version of ACR.. I found RT to be a very full featured RAW converter (esp. considering the price!), and I know that it has many, many more features than what you find in the PS Elements version of ACR.
In other words, you're not missing a thing (except for a slightly smoother workflow) using RT.
It stands to reason that Canon's own engineers would have great knowledge in converting RAW files to JPEG via the camera's internal converter, thereby making the JPEGs more accurate vis a vis color conversion than third party software conversions. So, using the in-camera JPEG for a template seems pretty sound to me.
Discussion
3 repliesAmazingly, it just resides on a memory card, and doesn't actually change the camera's firmware, so it's completely benign in terms of safety. Some of the coolest features are :
-- live histogram (in 7 different modes, including by color or luminance or several combos)
-- RAW capture
-- battery meter by percent or voltage
It's actually very cool, and has been fun to play with - I'm amazed that more of these features aren't provided by the manufacturers themselves.
But that brings me to my second question/problem; I've been working a little on RAW conversions (which I've never done before). I'm shooting in RAW+JPG, so I have the JPG as a reference, and I have to say that in general, the JPG always looks better color/tone wise. In the example I've posted here, the shot on the left is the JPG, and the right is the RAW conversion (CRW->DNG->JPG, since I couldn't get ACR in PS Elements 4 to open the CRW's the firmware creates).
The thing I'm most concerned with, and have a problem with, is the color of the guitar itself....the outer red rim and the way it blends toward the middle looks MUCH better and more ture to life to me in the JPG version. Any idea what's going on with the RAW conversion?
It's possible that I'm just getting crappy or pseudo RAW files, but I'm hoping it's something I'm doing wrong in ACR. I've tried quite a few settings and white balances, and no matter how much the back wall and couch look the same between the images, the guitar always seem funky.
Any ideas?
ACR uses two different profiles for each camera that it supports in order to handle colors correctly. ACR doesn't support the S2, which may be why the orange and red looks so funky here.
Normally, this isn't a big problem because ACR in CS3 has a Hue, Saturation, Luminance panel that targets 8 different colors (incl. orange and red) and which would make short work in getting the guitar body back to the colors that the S2 converted and produced for the JPEG file. Unfortunately, Elements 4 uses a truncated version of ACR which doesn't have that feature.
You could always select the body in Elements after your RAW conversion and then use a Hue/Saturation adjustment layer to non-destructively alter the colors.
Or you can try the full featured (and free!) RAWTherapee converter, which I'm pretty sure supports DNG files and has a lot more control over the conversion than does ACR in E4. RT may render those colors more to your liking.
Now my biggest problem is that I'm used to starting with a JPG that's pretty realistic, and now I'm trying to start with a RAW file that has a lot more latitude and possible interpretations. It's a little overwhelming...
I started using RAW Therapee when I found ACR in PS CS lacking, but abandoned it after upgrading to CS3, with a much more robust version of ACR.. I found RT to be a very full featured RAW converter (esp. considering the price!), and I know that it has many, many more features than what you find in the PS Elements version of ACR.
In other words, you're not missing a thing (except for a slightly smoother workflow) using RT.
It stands to reason that Canon's own engineers would have great knowledge in converting RAW files to JPEG via the camera's internal converter, thereby making the JPEGs more accurate vis a vis color conversion than third party software conversions. So, using the in-camera JPEG for a template seems pretty sound to me.