ceflynn Posted September 24, 2009 Share #1 Posted September 24, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) It appears that the observations in this article about how jpeg settings can affect the histogram seen on the back of the camera even while shooting RAW were left out of a few manuals: Settings for an Accurate Histogram Try to guess which three cameras do not have this problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 24, 2009 Posted September 24, 2009 Hi ceflynn, Take a look here Luminous Landscape article on histograms. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
guywalder Posted September 24, 2009 Share #2 Posted September 24, 2009 Try to guess which three cameras do not have this problem. that would be the 3 cameras with the smallest histograms, so small as to largely negate the supposed advantage being claimed for them in the addendum! Interesting article, but it presupposes your raw converter does not recognise camera settings. Presumably that should be 'does not recognise camera settings except WB'? However processing Nikon RAW files through NX does recognise camera settings, one of the reasons I find pp'ing my Nikon files a less painful experience than pp'ing my Leica files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgcd Posted September 24, 2009 Share #3 Posted September 24, 2009 Actually that would be 4 cameras, the first one being the DMR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted September 25, 2009 Share #4 Posted September 25, 2009 True, PS shows all kinds of clipping NX does not. I use CS3 less and less for Nikon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.