For those who want to eliminate most in-camera processing, I now have a small utility that will extract the image bits from a RAW file and perform only the simplest Bayer interpolation. (No sharpening - you have to do all that yourself).
> I hear you ... thks! > > alex wetmore wrote: > > > Yes. > > > > TIFF files have already gone through processing on the camera though > > (bayer processing and reduced to 8bits). They are also larger (17m vs > > 13m). You really want to use RAW if you don't want to use JPEG. > > > > You don't need to use Photoshop CS to process RAW, it just seems to > > have the best implementation of it right now. You can use the Pentax > > photo lab to convert RAW to 16-bit TIFF and process that in Photoshop. > > > > > > On Mon, 16 Feb 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > The only thing about moving to the istd is that I'd probably > > > want/need to upgrade Photoshop to CS ... and that might mean > > > investing more $$ into additional computer resources. I'm > > > not a JPEG shooter when I want the highest quality, so it > > > would be RAW or TIFF for me, I suppose. The istd does use > > > TIFF, right? >
