#USAGE OF RAWDIGGER FULL#
#USAGE OF RAWDIGGER WINDOWS 10#
#USAGE OF RAWDIGGER TRIAL#

#USAGE OF RAWDIGGER TRIAL#

IвЂ™ve allowed a large backlog to build up, and I want to clear it before I take on the distraction of choosing setting up and learning to use a new system, and the temptation of having a better editor to work with.Д¬lick to expand.My best option might be, once I have a new system, to try LightroomвЂ™s Melissa RGB histogram, and then use the offered trial of FastRawViewer to see if it works significantly better for me. But my main priority at present is sorting out which shots I want to keep, giving each of them a filename that identifies as clearly as possible what they show and where they were taken, and archiving them.

#USAGE OF RAWDIGGER FULL#

I intend in future to get a new PC, a large high-quality monitor, and a better image editor (probably Lightroom IвЂ™ve seen great praise for DxO, but unfortunately they donвЂ™t seem to cater for those of us who sometimes mount an APS-C lens on an FX Nikon body, although using full frame lenses on DX bodies is very well supported).

#USAGE OF RAWDIGGER WINDOWS 10#

IвЂ™m still working primarily on a desktop with 32-bit Windows Vista (I do have a Windows 10 laptop, but the screen and keyboard on the desktop are better, and I find Windows up to 7 more user-friendly than Windows 10, and have an even stronger preference for Office 2003 over subsequent versions). The catch for me is that it runs on 64-bit Windows 7 onwards. At these ISO levels IвЂ™d have little hesitation in deleting the ISO 2500 and ISO 1600 pairs of files if their JPEGs didnвЂ™t look better than the ISO 1000 one.Д¬lick to expand.Brilliant thanks Glenn! The display in FastRawViewerвЂ™s вЂњDetect the Over/Underexposed Areas from RAW DataвЂќ feature appears to be just what I hoped might be available, although I had hoped it would be an element or plug-in for popular image editing programs, rather than a fairly detailed program in its own right. So at higher ISOs I aim to keep exposure compensation more negative than I would in brighter conditions, and take particular care to check that I have an out-of-camera JPEG that doesnвЂ™t show burned-out highlights. So if, for example, the set covers ISO 1600, 10, if I brighten the ISO 1000 RAW file by 1в…“ EV, it should show almost identical shadow detail to the ISO 2500 file, but of course it will have retained far more highlight detail. This means that in fairly low light, my bracketed set will have the same aperture and shutter settings for each shot, but different ISO sensitivities.

The D800 also has an excellent Auto-ISO program, so I normally use this when shooting hand-held and bracketing. I realize that the sensor in my D800 is relatively ISO-invariant, so that above ISO 800 it loses approximately a stop of dynamic range for each extra ISO stop. My dilemma regarding whether to save or delete a RAW file when the corresponding JPEG has burned-out areas, and bracketing has given me a pair of files with a lower exposure, applies primarily to low ISOs. On the other hand, I assume the smaller the dynamic range, the less detail will be lost to the JPEG. I realize that retaining as much dynamic range as possible is even more valuable at high ISOs than low, because the sensorвЂ™s dynamic range is reduced.

Click to expand.I donвЂ™t remember much comment about ISO settings when various experts have referred to RAW files having more headroom for recording highlights than is shown in out-of-camera JPEGs.

Usage of rawdigger