Tag Archives: Doug Worrall Photographer

WHY SHOOT RAW Control The Interpretation Of The Image

WHY SHOOT RAW
To control the interpretation of the image yourself
Friday December 3 2010
The images below are shot in srbg jpeg and using the raw manipulator.They are not raw images, All images in 2011 the originals are Raw.All the images below I chose because they were of very poor quailty and needed adjustments, some were unaffective, I like to learn from mistakes, so never delete “in camera”  Enjoy the information in this article
Doug Worrall Photographer

All Gallery’s are shot and presented in the jpeg format sRGB for best resolution on a screen Will be interesting to see the next Gallery all RAW and just RBG in 2011

Before retouching

After retouching


The answer to the above question is, simply, control over the interpretation of the image. When you shoot JPEG, the camera’s on-board software carries out all the tasks listed in the last post          “Digital Photography and Raw Images”
to produce a color image, and then compresses it using JPEG compression. Some cameras let you set parameters for this conversion—typically, a choice of sRGB or Adobe RGB (1998) as color space,a sharpness value, and perhaps a tone curve or contrast setting—but unless your shooting schedule is atypically leisurely, you probably can’t adjust these parameters on an image-by-image basis, so you’re locked into the camera’s interpretation of the scene. JPEGs offer fairly limited editing headroom—large moves to tone and color tend to exaggerate the 8-by-8-pixel blocksthat form the foundation of JPEG compression—and while JPEG does a pretty good job of preserving luminance data, it really clobbers the color,leading to problems with skin tones and gentle gradations.When you shoot raw, however, you get to control the scene interpretation through all the aforementioned aspects of the Post. With raw, the only on-camera settings that have an effect on the captured pixels are the ISO speed, shutter speed, and aperture. Everything else is under your control when you convert the raw file. You can reinterpret the white balance, the colorimetric rendering, the tonal response, and the detail rendition (sharpeningand noise reduction) with a great deal of freedom., “Exposure and Linear Capture,”you can even reinterpret the basic exposure itself, resetting the white and black points.
Before retouching
After retouching
“Most of today’s cameras capture at least 12 bits per channel per pixel, for
a possible 4,096 levels in each channel. More bits translates directly into
editing headroom, but the JPEG format is limited to 8 bits per channel per
pixel. So when you shoot JPEG, you trust the camera’s built-in conversions
to throw away one-third of your data in a way that does justice to the image.”
When you shoot raw, though, you have, by definition, captured everything
the camera can deliver, so you have much greater freedom in shaping the
overall tone and contrast for the image. You also produce a file that can
withstand a great deal more editing in Photoshop than an 8-bit-per-channel
JPEG can.
Edits in Photoshop are destructive—when you use a tool such as Levels,
Curves, Hue/Saturation, or Color Balance, you change the actual pixel
values, creating the potential for either or both of two problems:
before the clipping fixed
After clipping eradicated
• Posterization can occur when you stretch a tonal range. Where the
levels were formerly adjacent, they’re now stretched apart, so instead
of a gradation from, for example, level 100 through 101, 102, 103, 104,
to 105, the new values may look more like 98, 101, 103, 105, and 107.
On its own, such an edit is unlikely to produce visible posterization—
it usually takes a gap of four or five levels before you see a visible jump
instead of a smooth gradation—but subsequent edits can widen the
gaps, inducing posterization.
• Detail loss can occur when you compress a tonal range. Where the
levels were formerly different, they’re now compressed into the same
value, so the differences, which represent potential detail, are tossed
irrevocably into the bit bucket, never to return.
Before
After effects
The images  were transformed from a regular jpeg format using camera Raw some of the outcomes were obvious and  not good, Most “were” throw away images, but I wanted to try to see
if they could be made better.
Sorces: Wikipedia, Wowebook
Doug Worrall Photographer


All Gallery’s are shot and presented in the jpeg format sRGB for best resolution on a screen Will be interesting to see the next Gallery all RAW and just RBG in 2011

[cincopa AQKAvVKoqbWV]

Conservation vs Control in Coote’s Paradise Hamilton

Conservation vs Control in Coote’s Paradise Hamilton

FRIDAY JULY 23 2010

In 1974, a request came form RGB for control  of Coote’s Paradise.  But, the Hamilton Harbor Commission held tightly to the control  it claims it had under the 1912 Act Of Parliament by which it was created.  In fact, the 1912 Act of Parliament …supercedes the 28 year-old RGB legislation.
Now, the conservation issue in 1974, was the preservation of Coote’s Paradise being in doubt because of a recommendation that would double the release of sewage into Coote’s Paradise.  It was suggested to construct a sewage line along the base of Coote’s Paradise and Burlington Bay to the east-end Woodward plant.  Then RGB director, Leslie Laking, had great concerns about the decision.  he said “The RGB would have no effluent in Coote’s Paradise from here on in.”  And, chairman of the Harbor Board, Ed Tharen, ” pointed an accusing finger at the Dundas sewage treatment plant as the major polluter responsible for that gunk being poured into Coote’s Paradise.”
MUDDY WATERS MERGE INTO HAMILTON HARBOUR
MUDDY WATERS MERGE INTO HAMILTON HARBOUR
Stewart Morison, Ducks Unlimited Canada which is an offshoot of the U.S. group, in 1987, expects to spend $43 million in 1988 to build and restore wetland habitat for waterfowl.  Morison looked at prospects for involvement in a Coote’s Paradise project proposed by RGB biologist Len Simer.  From the high level bridge, Simer described the marshland’s problems and potential underlining three issues that hamper growth of plants needed for good wildlife habitat.  Perceptual opportunities for current difficulties hampering wildlife habitat in Coote’s are a justaposition of elements  and how they relate to each other, such as :: (1) wind-stirred mud; (2) bottom-feeding carp, and, (3) changing water levels. Carp and other invasive species continue to be an issue, even in 2,010 ,  Reduction of Carp is due to the Fishway operation.  This allows other fish and plants to return to the marshland.
CARP STRIRRING UP MUD
CARP STRIRRING UP MUD
SWARM OF CATFISH IN COOTES PARADISE
SWARM OF CATFISH IN COOTES PARADISE
ONLOOKERS OF THE MANY SWARMS
ONLOOKERS OF THE MANY SWARMS

In 1988, Ducks unlimited Canada said “Half of Coote’s Paradise can be restored to the wetland wildlife preserve it was earlier this century.  DUC, provincial  manager John Blain told RGB board of directors.  The now flooded swamp and surrounding wetlands at the far west end of Hamilton Harbor are part of RGB property.  Blain said “Coote’s Paradise restoration – We believe it’s feasible in terms of both biology and engineering and asked the conservation group to investigate.

In 1988, DUC would build more than 3 km (2 miles of earthen dikes to wall off 3 km (250 acres) of open water below the McMaster University CampusThis exciting initiative included: (1) Water depth would be lowered to foster the growth of natural marsh plants needed for good wildlife habitate; (2) There would be NO CARP to uproot young plants; and, (3) There would be less wind-stirred MUD to block sunlight.
Coote’s Paradise had another concern in 1988 because the region set sites on a Perimeter Road (now hwy. 403).  The north-side alternative was cheapest to build at $48 million.  Planners backed the north-south site because it would offer drivers an attractive view of the waterfront.  The Hamilton Harbor Commission would have to approve the scheme.  Now the negative side is beastly ugly because it includes three issues:
(1) Noise would affect the western harbour and
proposed waterfront park.  ( Now in 2,010 we
have a beautiful waterfont part with little
noise).
(2) The harbor’s surface area, volume and fish
habitat would be reduced.
(3) Fill would be needed in Coote’s Paradise.  And, thank goodness for former Alderman Mary Kiss, who recommened “to build 403 hwy WITHOUT PUTTING FILL IN COOTE’S PARADISE – one of the most ecologically important areas
To MUCH CONTROL
To MUCH CONTROL
BEAUTY IN PARADISE
BEAUTY IN PARADISE
Memory is like Jazz.  Life jazz, memory has more to do with now than then.  Then is just fiction now.
Surrender
in Two Sides of a Centre
Robert Clark Yates

Would like to thank Robert Yates for his inspirational books and watchful eye on Cootes paradise.

Enjoy the pictures and information today and  have a great weekend.
Doug Worrall Photographer