The Post Processing Challenge!

[kcf955 1]

I thought it would be fun as well as educational to see what would happen if we all processed the same RAW file and posted our results in this thread. It would be interesting to see what each others workflow is and see what the differences are in the resulting images.

 

I have put up a Canon RAW file that can be downloaded below. The file is 13 megs so be patient. The image is of a White shark that I took recently at Guadalupe, you are more than welcome to use it as you wish, just send me checks or cash if you sell the image

 

When you post your processed image save it out as a jpeg 800x533pixels so that the images are the same size for comparison purposes and list the steps you took in your image conversion.

 

 

DOWNLOAD RAW FILE

-------------

Here is a jpeg of the RAW file with no correction/processing except to resize and convert to jpeg so you will have an idea of what the original RAW file looks like:

 

[kcf955 1]

Here is my shot at it:

 

Convert in Adobe Camera Raw

White Balance Tool/eyedropper and find a neutral white area and click.

Exposure adjustment to +.66

Bump Contrast to +33

Saturation +12

Under Lens tab adjust Vignetting to +50 (Pitfall of using 17-40mm at17mm/f4.5 on a 1Ds)

 

Open in PS

Re-size to 800 x 533 @ 72 ppi (for this example)

Levels Adjustment Layer and adjust mid point to the right for a little more contrast

Convert Mode to LAB color, select the Lightness Channel

Unsharp Mask 300/.3/0

Save for web

----

[MikeVeitch 0]

Interesting idea Keith. I think you will get some of those with a fast internet to do it.

 

Will be interesting to see the results

[kcf955 1]

Sorry about the file size. I tried to compress it using Stuffit and it only reduced it to 12megs. I'm not real versed in zipping things.

[acroporas 0]

The downloading it was the easy part. My computer really does not appreciate 16mp files. Perhaps I need to upgrade my computer before I consider upgrading cameras.

[herbko 0]

Sorry about the file size. I tried to compress it using Stuffit and it only reduced it to 12megs. I'm not real versed in zipping things.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The Canon raw file are already compressed. I'm not surprised generic compression applied to it does not compress it much further.

 

Here's my version... This is not one where post processing can make a big difference.

 

[kcf955 1]

The Canon raw file are already compressed. I'm not surprised generic compression applied to it does not compress it much further.

 

Ahhh, thanks Herb, just learned something new.

[echeng 0]

This is a GREAT IDEA, and we should do it more. In the future, if you ever need hosting for the raw image, please let me or James know and we'll put it up on Wetpixel.

[echeng 0]

A quick attempt. Conversion with Capture One (white balanced, a bit of exposure adjustment), and some Photoshop work (crop, selective darken of blues).

 

 

[kcf955 1]

Thanks Eric for the conversion with C-1! I have heard a lot of postive comments about using C-1 for RAW. Can you get the same results with PS CS2 or is C-1 just better? I know, kind of a subjective question but interesting...

 

Keith

[acroporas 0]

Here's mine. I went for a more contrasty scene than the others. Probably over processed but I was having fun.

 

I converted in adobe. I found the necessary WB was too high >10000K so the red channel was quite noisy. So I dropped the red chanel and replaced it with the green chanel. The noise probably wouldnt show up at this size but it was very obvious at larger sizes. I also added some of the green chanel to the blue chanel to get more contrast between the subject and the water. I then adjusted hue/saturation to make the water closer to the right colour. I then hand drew a curve for the red channel to get water the colour I wanted it. Finally I increased contrast further with USM. Resized and sharpend.

 

[Giles 1]

My attempt using Photoshop CS2

RAW Conversions with White Balance Alteration and saturation adjustents to blues

Photoshoped the redness in the fish in the foreground and auto everything else.

oh and cropped it some too. Which i dont normally do .. but seemed to work better here.

 

Not perfect but not bad

 

and here's my 100% crop

 

 

Just as well to add .. the image I can see in photoshop before saving is a lot darker and more contrastey and doesn't appear overexposed as this one does .. I used save for web .. not sure if that is why the image seems to change or not.

 

Giles

[echeng 0]

Giles - there's another thread about converting to srgb before saving for web. Did you do that?

 

In general, I'm not a fan of Adobe Camera RAW. I much prefer C1's output. I only with C1 had CA correction built in!

[Giles 1]

Eric ... your result and mine is very similar when viewed by me ..

 

.. my sharks white areas look a little over exposed compared to yours .. you think that is difference in processing .. or somethign i did ?

[yahsemtough 0]

Great post and exercise.

 

I prefer Eric's adjustment. I will try to play with this myself and see how I do. I have learned form this already so great thread idea.

[echeng 0]

Eric ... your result and mine is very similar when viewed by me ..

 

.. my sharks white areas look a little over exposed compared to yours .. you think that is difference in processing .. or somethign i did ?

Yours looks over-processed to me. It has to be a difference in processing, since that's the only thing that's different... ?

 

Anyway, mine has a touch of red that I don't like, but it was a 3-min job, and I didn't have time to make it perfect.

[Lndr 0]

I like Eric's water - The blue is not too overdone & the sunbeams look more like sunbeams than artifacts.

 

I like Keith's shark - Nice tones, not blown out.

 

Make's me thing going RAW is gonna be a real challenge

[segal3 0]

I don't usually use any layers...but some of the tools I used to work on this image employs them, so whatever

 

 

C1Pro using EOS-1DsMkII generic profile -> sRGB IEC61966-2.1

WB Temp: 12800K

Tint: 22

Hue: 35deg

Sat: 13

Film standard

EC: +0.45

CC: +7

CS: 0.0%

Standard Look, 16%, 3

Exposure 21, 0.97, 255

Crop

Output to 8bit TIFF, 100%

 

PS CS2

PixelGenius PhotoKit Color - RCA Gray Balance Fine

PixelGenius PhotoKit Color - Blue darken + mask (opacity 20%, blue sat 40%, mask 30%)

PhotoKit Capture Sharpener - Digital Hi-Res Sharpen, Wide Edge Sharpen

Resize to 800x533

PhotoKit Output Sharpener - Web and Multimedia, 800px Wide Edge Sharpen

Save to jpg

 

Time? 2min max.

 

~Matt Segal

[AndreSmith 9]

In general, I'm not a fan of Adobe Camera RAW. I much prefer C1's output. I only with C1 had CA correction built in!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I would agree with that.

Another worthy competitor is Raw Essentials 2005 from Pixmantec. Definitely worthwile checking out as it is FREE!

Raw Essentials 2005

[Giles 1]

so lets see what you got with it then

[AndreSmith 9]

Yikes - you put me on the spot!

 

So here goes in Raw Essentials:

temp 9950

Tint 39

Appearance -Outdoor normal

EC 0.52

Fil light 0

Shadow contrast 16

Highlight contrast 45

Sat -7

default JPG conversion

 

Resize, mild sharpening and SRGB mode conversion in Photoshop

 

[herbko 0]

The problem with this one is there's enough distance between the shark and the school of small fish in the forground that the lighting is different on the two. With out doing some selection, you'll end up with either a blue shark or pink forground fish.

[echeng 0]

Definitely not a fan of RSE, yet. I love the speed and simplicity, but the output is sort of crappy.

 

Herb is right. I had to tone down the reds in the fish once white balanced. Would have done a better job if I had to.

[mattdiver 0]

Here's what you get after 15s on Bibble, and a "Save for Web" in Photoshop. Less than 1min total editing time.

 

 

The colours look better on the TIFF (AdobeRGB) format than on the JPEG sRGB version...

 

Mat

[kcf955 1]

Like your shark and water Mat! Good job. The fish in this one are definately tricky as they get redish/purple in them when you correct the water and shark.

 

Keith