Why use a dedicated RAW processor before editing in Photoshop or PaintShop Pro?
Asked 2/28/2018
2 views
2 answers
0
I often see photographers first develop RAW files in software such as AfterShot Pro, Lightroom, or Adobe Camera Raw, and then send the image to an editor like Photoshop or PaintShop Pro for further work. Why is this workflow common? Is there a technical advantage to processing RAW separately first, or is it mainly a software/marketing split? What can a RAW processor do that a general image editor may not do as well once the file has been converted to an RGB image?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
8y ago
2 Answers
5
Dedicated applications to process RAW files exist because some things are best done from RAW (like noise reduction) before conversion to an RGB format (because RAW are not RGB formats) and because there are many specialist algorithms that can be applied to RAW to reduce artifacts from demosaicing in special situations.
In particular noise is "spread out" by demosaicing from RAW formats (which all images start from even if the camera does not explicitly support RAW files). Once this is done you cannot undo the effect. So noise reduction needs (ideally) to be done as a first step in RAW development.
As you cannot undo RAW conversion to an RGB format, you cannot undo the effects of noise and artifacts in images as well as you can from RAW.
Now for most people this is unnecessary as they'll frankly manage fine with the JPEG straight from camera. But for some people who want to squeeze every last detail from an image the extra detail of dedicated RAW developer applications is worth it.
Note that something like the Camera Raw plugin in Photoshop is essentially an application that sits between Photoshop and the RAW file.
In general there is a software philosophy at work which tries to make separate units or applications to handle specific tasks. This lets developer isolate tasks and optimize them without complicating the software development process in undesirable ways.
Is it just the marketing strategy of companies to divide their software into pieces to make more profit?
Blame your camera companies.
The camera makers seem to feel that changing RAW file formats with every new model makes some kind of sense and, not only do they not make the formats public (making it very hard for software developers) but they've even been known to encrypt parts of RAW files. They could use a common format that would make software development easier for all concerned, but they don't.
As software development costs money and as the makers of software have to at least break even, it's not surprising that commercial software that reads RAW files costs more money for new versions.
Originally by user46861. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user46861
8y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
A separate RAW-processing step is common for real technical reasons, not just marketing.
RAW data is not yet a normal RGB image. During RAW development, the software demosaics the sensor data and applies corrections. Some edits are best done at this stage, especially noise reduction, because once the RAW data is converted to RGB, noise and artifacts get “spread out” and are harder to remove cleanly. In some cases, specialized RAW algorithms can also reduce demosaicing artifacts better than later editing can.
Another reason is workflow: general editors like Photoshop or PaintShop Pro are often built around editing one image at a time, while many RAW processors are designed to handle large batches of photos, apply the same settings to many files, and often organize/tag them.
So the split usually reflects two different jobs:
- RAW processor: develop, batch-adjust, organize
- Image editor: detailed retouching and pixel-level edits
Some programs do overlap, but the two-stage workflow exists because certain adjustments are more effective before RAW conversion, and because batch photo management is a different task from detailed image editing.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI8y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why do RAW files look different and show different histograms in different software?
Why use RAW processors like Lightroom or Darktable instead of converting to 16-bit TIFF and editing elsewhere?
Can I transfer Lightroom edit metadata to AfterShot Pro when switching software?
Do I need Adobe Camera Raw if I already use Lightroom?
How do I open Nikon D3400 NEF RAW files in Corel AfterShot 3?