> >I can't understand why anybody avoids the use of raw files - unless > >they are only taking holiday snaps - IMO ;o) > I am shooting Super High Quality Jpeg. > Because if I shoot using Tiff it takes forever > to write a file and to tell you the truth I just haven't > gotten around to playing with Raw files yet. > I am not trying to start a debate here........................... But are you tring to stop one? > Do what works best for you > It makes me wonder though.................... > If the modeling lights are affecting the balance. > If I shoot a white card to get a custom white balance would they > affect that also? I guess to be safe I would have to turn off > the modeling lights before I set up to take the exposure. You would have to consult your camera manual for that. Is "custom white balance" a predictive thing: that is are the lookup tables created before you take the shot or is it a post-capture thing - ie acting a bit like auto-levels in photoshop? Is there even a standard. If I had your camera I'd take a couple of "frames" (are they called that anymore now we are digital). Both using "auto-white-balance". For one I'd have your usual lights on before the flash and for the other I'd cover them with some orange / red material to give a deliberate colour cast (not over the flashes obviously). Then compare the results. Assuming flash was to be the dominant light source - how would they compare. I don't have your camera - and I guess you can waste a lot of time experimenting for fun. In an ideal world people would not have to worry about file sizes and transfer rates (not to mention the cost of storage media). You can make all the justifications you like for jpeg - but quality is not one of them. Like all things in life it's a balance. Bob PS ... must be a long time since anyone got bumped off the gallery. A response to all the reviews last week maybe?
