Ilya - Thanks for your earlier note -- I am quite happy to stand corrected and your post suggests a basic experiment I can easily do: compare in-camera processed and post-processed RAW images for the same scene and settings. I'll have a limited sample to work with: my only camera delivering RAW images is a Pentax K100D, quite dated now by newer technology. On the other hand, I can compare UFRaw into GIMP and Photoshop Elements with the Pentax plug-in into PSE and (if I have a suitable intermediate format) into GIMP. At the very least I'll learn something. If I see anything surprising or interesting I may share it and hopefully get useful feedback. Anyway, there's no substitute for knowing what one's own equipment does. On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Ilya Zakharevich wrote: > On 2009-09-30, Carusoswi <forums@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> In the spirit of the OP's question, if you make no adjustments in >> UFRAW, is there any more latitude for adjustment in the resultant JPG >> file (in Gimp or other editing application) than what you might get >> straight from the camera? > This is not a very have-a-clear-answer topic. > I would guess that with Canon, the answer is straightforward: the > RAW-converted output would be SIGNIFICANTLY better than in-camera one > in ALL respects. Dynamic range, handling of clipping, handling of > noise, sharpness, etc. > With cameras which use more advanced versions of the Apical Iridex > hardware or firmware (starting with Sony, but Nikon is reported to be > in process of catching up), the situation is not as clear. I did not > see any report of RAW processor which can match Apical-style "Dynamic > Range Optimizations". > So: there might be one respect (tonal mapping, sometimes called > "dynamic range") in which RAW-processed-JPEG might be not as good as > in-camera one... I'm not sure I follow that, unless the sensor's bit-depth and that of the camera's RAW format are different. I'm not at the stage of getting full scale from my images: still working for consistent, decent quality prints from straight-forward subjects. - Mills _______________________________________________ Gimp-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user