The article shows it very clearly in the process diagram. The author
is, as I said before, an optics professional and understands digital
camera operation at a level few people outside the manufacturers
do. I would take his word over a newsstand magazine any day of the week.
A few more references:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canond30/page14.asp
http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/camera-raw.shtml
http://www.creativepro.com/story/review/19008.html
http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug_002_raw_deal.pdf
This is really basic information, there's no controversy around
it. RAW is RAW. It has nothing applied to it, no white balance, no
contrast, no anything but exposure. That's why it's called
RAW. White balance MUST be applied after downloading the RAW file
since there is no white balance applied to a RAW file in the
camera. The image file does carry header information about the white
balance setting in the camera, but it's just header information and
used by most RAW converters as a starting point. However, the file
itself is completely unaffected by the WB setting.
Once again, this is basic to the nature of a RAW file. Any decent
reference on what a RAW file is explains this.
At 12:34 PM 10/12/2005, Terry wrote:
This article never in any way said weather a white balance had an
effect or not on the RAW file, however there was an article in, I
believe it was Digital photo pro magazine which did say that the
white balance that was chosen did have an effect on the RAW file and
showed examples of how this is good and bad for the conversion, so
now I guess we need to decide which article to trust one which did
not take a side or the other which did, for me I will continue to do
custom white balances on all of my RAW files when I shoot them.
Terry L. Mair
Mair's Photography
158 South 580 East
Midway, Utah 84049
435-654-3607
www.mairsphotography.com
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Spirer" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students"
<photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: ExpoDisc: Overpriced gadget for suckers?
This isn't something there is any question about it. There's an
article about an optics engineer and photographer here:
http://www.photo.net/learn/raw/
that shows how it works. There's a hundred other places to get the
same information. RAW comes off the sensor without any settings
applied. That means white balance settings don't matter.
At 08:20 AM 10/12/2005, Terry wrote:
All I can say is look it up or better yet try it your self!
Terry L. Mair
Mair's Photography
158 South 580 East
Midway, Utah 84049
435-654-3607
www.mairsphotography.com
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Spirer" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students"
<photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: ExpoDisc: Overpriced gadget for suckers?
This is incorrect. White balance is applied by the camera only
when creating a jpg. The RAW data is unaffected by the white
balance setting, which becomes simply header information for the converter.
At 07:09 AM 10/12/2005, Terry wrote:
I guess what I am trying to explain is that lets say you take
two pictures exactly the same except you use different white
balances' when you create them you will not necessarily get the
same result using the raw file converter to "Fix" the white
balance weather you have a properly exposed file or not.
Jeff Spirer
Photos: http://www.spirer.com
One People: http://www.onepeople.com/
Surfaces and Marks: http://www.withoutgrass.com
Jeff Spirer
Photos: http://www.spirer.com
One People: http://www.onepeople.com/
Surfaces and Marks: http://www.withoutgrass.com
Jeff Spirer
Photos: http://www.spirer.com
One People: http://www.onepeople.com/
Surfaces and Marks: http://www.withoutgrass.com
