I tend to agree and do the same, but..
The way I understand it every digital camera generates a jpg which is
what gives you the picture on the LCD. It is small, the same size as
the LCD, because that is the only way you can get the instant
response you need for that function. This jpg gets the settings from
the camera like white balance. Now here is the tricky part. The
histogram is generated off this jpg. If you have a single histogram
it is just the green channel from that jpg. So, depending on your
camera settings, your exposure may be off on your raw file because
you are looking LCD exposure guides based on jpg.
So you could have an inappropriate color temperature setting that in
certain light would blow the exposure in the red channel for instance
and not have a clue from the histogram, only finding it when you open
your raw file. That said, I find that most of the automatic settings
and cranking back a bit on the contrast and saturation gives a well
exposed image raw image that preserves all the information and is
easy to work with in Photoshop.
At least I think so now. :-)
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Mar 31, 2006, at 12:36 PM, Walt Wayman wrote:
> Exactly! Moose scores again! Shoot RAW and just adjust it later
> to look like you want it to. Who cares whether it was really 4500K
> or 6400K as long as you can make it look okay later? I don't.
> Don't even know how to set white balance on either the E-1 or
> E-330. Don't intend to learn.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|