How good were the early DSLR Cameras?

[AAFO_WSagar]

I used to shoot with zero anything, in the combo of RAW and FINE JPG. They have always, by nature, looked a bit like proofs to me in that format. For the sake of rapidly being able to share an image, and get a better idea via the preview window, knowing that the RAW image is unaltered (hard for me to actually trust!) and that only the .jpg will be actually altered... I put in some of the same sort of automatic settings that most p&s cameras have.. a bit of contrast, sharpening, just a bit, that's really about it..

What I'm getting at is, in some ways, it would seem that there is a choice of submitting either an apple, or, an orange the way the rules are written.

I guess the question is, the term "out of the camera" can be more than one image.

I wasn't going to submit in the contest, thinking that it's my site and it's not fair to really compete in a contest hosted here, but what to heck, I didn't start it and I am going to submit one photo because it's probably the best, most lucky shot I've ever taken!

What my real question is, since, I *think* the settings that I give the camera to display a bit better preview via the .jpg copy, are they added to the initial view that I would get, for instance, opening a raw image?

Clarifying (I hope) are my out of camera RAW images showing my .jpg settings?

[wingman]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

I'm not sure what you're asking, so 2 answers. An "out of the camera" submission would be just your jpeg. A bit of cropping might or might not be allowed.

Picture control settings and such set in the camera have no effect on the RAW image-- they just alter the way the camera renders the jpeg. However, I think that if you are using any Nikon software to do RAW conversions the software can read your picture control camera settings and apply them to your RAW image. This is reversible, unlike the camera jpeg settings which are baked into the jpeg.

If you are exporting your RAW image to Adobe Lightroom or Photoshop the in camera settings for contrast, sharpness etc do not apply at all. Adobe cannot read them so you start from scratch on your RAW.

Does that make any sense?

Neal

[AAFO_WSagar]

How good were the early DSLR Cameras?

OK, in a different thread, Wingman challenged the second series of Nikon's Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras (specifically the D2X) as being not good pylon tools. I begged to differ.

I'd like to qualify my opinions by stating that I was the first film turncoat to jump on the DLSR bandwagon with Nikon's first "affordable" DSLR film body. I say affordable because the D1 was $5000. when the best Nikon film body could be had for less than half that. And, magazines had yet to fire their film processing "art department" and make the switch to the digital revolution.

To say there was a distinct bias against digital shots then by those who had yet to sleep next to the pod would be an understatement!

SO Throwing the gauntlet down, so to speak, in the other thread, Neal has stated that DSLR cameras only became worthy of serious consideration for pylon work with the release of the Nikon D3.

I beg to differ!

This is only a screen grab turned into an image of a D2X pylon shot.. the shooting info is right there to see..

Not worthy for pylon work? This actually is not shot with the camera we were actually discussing, which shoots, actually better at the pylons because it's got a faster FPS but it has a much smaller pixel output... (much research should be done to truly understand "pixels")

I will say... balderdash by a late bloomer (into the digital world)

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Does that make any sense?l

Yea, makes total sense.. in the Nikon DSLR bodies, if you do not add any image correction pre download, all of which is available to you before taking a single shot, to your .jpg file, and I'm not talking about a file that I'm not seeing in my download file, should there be one, that is an automatically adjusted file to show in the camera preview window. What I'm talking about is if your shooting menu has you shooting dual, RAW/JPG.. you have the ability, pre shoot, to add correction to an image, which will show up when you download your .jpg files, as well as in your RAW files. With the RAW, you have the ability to NOT apply those settings to your ultimate edit of the RAW file.. the .jpg is forever saved with those settings..

My question was...

How do you determine "out of camera"

It's a very legitimate question Neal, since we have to define "out of camera" since there is the option to program in any adjustment you want, pre shot.

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Picture control settings and such set in the camera have no effect on the RAW image-- they just alter the way the camera renders the jpeg. However, I think that if you are using any Nikon software to do RAW conversions the software can read your picture control camera settings and apply them to your RAW image. This is reversible, unlike the camera jpeg settings which are baked into the jpeg.

I believe I see the confusion...

You are correct, picture control settings don't have any permanent affect on the RAW image but, as I've seen, if you add controls prior to shoot, you download your "raw" image with those adjustments SHOWING in the image when you load it into Capture... You see them, you put them in, they show in your raw image, but you can choose NOT to see them by exiting the checkbox..

I think you're not using capture and are unaware that your in camera settings are being imported to lightroom if that's what you're using as your editor. If I'm wrong, I'll certainly admit so!

[wingman]

Re: How good were the early DSLR Cameras?

Great shot! I never said there is anything at all wrong with the photos produced by cameras before the D3.

This was shot with a D200 -- my first digital camera. It was shot as a jpeg, not a RAW, as I had not figured out RAW yet. I've sold two 17x24 inch prints of this -- one to the pilot, Dan Vance. The big prints are smooth and flawless.

There's nothing wrong with earlier digital SLRs -- they're just not as good as current digital SLRs. The biggest difference is in focusing speed and accuracy. I think you're proving that with your fancy new D4, Wayne. Otherwise why would you buy something like that?

Neal

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: How good were the early DSLR Cameras?

There's nothing wrong with earlier digital SLRs -- they're just not as good as current digital SLRs. The biggest difference is in focusing speed and accuracy. I think you're proving that with you fancy new D4, Wayne. Otherwise why would you buy something like that?

Neal

Good lord Neal, please read back to the original message that started this. I was speaking with Leo about getting my D2H in his hands for a REALLY low price, wherein, you jump in and state that a completely DIFFERENT camera, one that most of my work was produced with for the last several years was **** for pylon work?

This thread has begun to remind me of presidential politics! Someone says one thing you respond to something else...

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: How good were the early DSLR Cameras?

Crap, I'm done.. maybe I understand why I've just laid back in the shadows on this forum for so long...

[wingman]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

I think you're not using capture and are unaware that your in camera settings are being imported to lightroom if that's what you're using as your editor. If I'm wrong, I'll certainly admit so!

I quit using any Nikon software at all years ago. I import directly to Photoshop (actually Adobe Bridge which is part of Photoshop). When I open an image I see no altered camera settings at all -- I get the RAW image and have to start from scratch.

Trust me -- the picture control settings are not seen by Adobe at all.

Neal

[wingman]

Re: How good were the early DSLR Cameras?

I'm genuinely sorry to have offended you Wayne. I apologise for anything I said to get you worked up. This is supposed to be fun...

And remember that I said the D2X is a great camera. I said that in the original post that upset you. It is a wonderful camera. I thought that was the camera you were discussing with Leo (my mistake) and I was telling him it's a great camera. Leo doesn't do pylon work these days, as far as I know -- I was trying to tell him that the D2x is a great machine.

Neal

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

I quit using any Nikon software at all years ago. I import directly to Photoshop (actually Adobe Bridge which is part of Photoshop). When I open an image I see no altered camera settings at all -- I get the RAW image and have to start from scratch.

Trust me -- the picture control settings are not seen by Adobe at all.

Neal

Cool Neal, so you use Abobe, which does not see the control settings.. that's great.

So a person who does not have Adobe and submits an out of camera image that HAS the adjustments..

Done with discussion, you're correct...

AAFO_Wsagar

OUT

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: How good were the early DSLR Cameras?

AND, I'm not trying to say anyone would intentionally warp the intent here...

MY QUESTION address my wish to understand what you guys consider "out of camera" when, with the software some of us use, the settings you put into the camera, ARE used in your initial view of the image RAW with proprietary software.. In other words, I'm not totally sure how I would submit a completely unaltered photo since I put in some perks to ease my view of the folders when first shot..

[wingman]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Yea, makes total sense.. in the Nikon DSLR bodies, if you do not add any image correction pre download, all of which is available to you before taking a single shot, to your .jpg file, and I'm not talking about a file that I'm not seeing in my download file, should there be one, that is an automatically adjusted file to show in the camera preview window. What I'm talking about is if your shooting menu has you shooting dual, RAW/JPG.. you have the ability, pre shoot, to add correction to an image, which will show up when you download your .jpg files, as well as in your RAW files. With the RAW, you have the ability to NOT apply those settings to your ultimate edit of the RAW file.. the .jpg is forever saved with those settings..

My question was...

How do you determine "out of camera"

It's a very legitimate question Neal, since we have to define "out of camera" since there is the option to program in any adjustment you want, pre shot.

Let me start by saying that I don't know much about the Nikon image processing software. IF the Nikon software is applying your picture control settings on import, then the result "should" look just like the jpg. If they look the same, either could be considered the out of the camera image. In my case the out of the camera image just doesn't look very good -- it's essentially a digital negative. I then process it to my own taste. It's just a different process.

I'd never enter one of my shots in an "out of the camera" category because most of my shots look like crap out of the camera. That's the nature of the beast.

Neal

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Let me start by saying that I don't know much about the Nikon image processing software. IF the Nikon software is applying your picture control settings on import, then the result "should" look just like the jpg. If they look the same, either could be considered the out of the camera image. In my case the out of the camera image just doesn't look very good -- it's essentially a digital negative. I then process it to my own taste. It's just a different process.

I'd never enter one of my shots in an "out of the camera" category because most of my shots look like crap out of the camera. That's the nature of the beast.

Neal

You have nailed it.. that's the question I've been asking! Cowpony is AWESOME in getting this contest going and I was quite simply confused by the nomenclature of the term "out of camera"... today, at least with DSLR's, there is NO out of camera!

With a RAW, you can dial back everything to zero, don't think you can do that with a p&s, completely unaware what the jpeg settings are on consumer dslr's but I'd totally suspect that they are set to produce a satisfying image, unlike the big heavy bricks some of us shoot, which the manufactures completely understand that their consumers don't want ANYTHING added to their image that they did not put there.

[wingman]

Re: How good were the early DSLR Cameras?

Correct -- at least by my often confused understanding of all this.