Mikeinlagardette

Mikeinlagardette

Posted on 07/19/2015


Photo taken on June 29, 2015


See also...

Gimp Photo Gimp Photo


Historical & Architectural Gems Historical & Architectural Gems


Canon Photography Canon Photography


Black and White Black and White


See more...

Keywords

digital
canon
garden
monochrome
ixus
CHDK


Authorizations, license

Visible by: Everyone
Attribution + non Commercial + no derivative

Photo replaced on July 20, 2015
497 visits

Morning Coffee

Morning Coffee
The little yard at the back of our house is a good place to take a break!

More play with the Canon Ixus 960is, still running under CHDK software. This is a jpeg, taken originally in colour, with the EV set to 20 ISO, which is one of the many extra variables that can be controlled in CHDK. The result at full size is such that I'm not sure if I really need to use the RAW facility!


Canon Digital Ixus 960is running CHDK 1.3.0. Vers. 100d. Canon zoom lens at approx 50mm equivalent, f11@1/200th, ISO 20. Photo-finished in Gimp

SYLDERO, Hen's March, Katharina K-S and 2 other people have particularly liked this photo


6 comments - The latest ones
Robert Warren
Robert Warren
Its very nice and looks very cosy!
2 years ago.
Mikeinlagardette has replied to Robert Warren
Robert, thanks for your kind words!
2 years ago.
RobbeK
RobbeK
HI Mike,

Great .. 20iso ;-) wish i could do this (no software hacks for Nikon )
The main difference between jpeg and raw is that jpeg is 8 bits / channel and nef (the Nikon raw - dunno about Canon ) is 12 or 14 bits.
This translates as 2^8 = 256 shades per channel for jpeg , and 4096 / 16384 for nef .
As for B&W , this means r=g=b resulting in 254 shades of grey for the jpeg (considering 0,0,0 is black and 255,255,255 is white ), while this looks poor at first sight, it isn't -- the human eye will not able to see any finer grey scale , and furthermore most of the tools showing the result are restricted to these values whatever the input is.
Also a translated RAW image is less sharp , darker , flatter etc .... , but once the manipulation starts you can recover a lot lot more from RAW - both shadow parts and highlights can be manipulated with less risk of collapsing.
(well, it's easy -- because the RAWs contain more data/information they have a wider range of manipulation possibilities) , imho it seems it are the highlights that especially need care with the jpegs -- no doubt in the future there will be software compressing these as well , after all any jpeg is a conversion from the RAW -- it's all a question of software these days ....

best, Rob
2 years ago. Edited 2 years ago.
Mikeinlagardette has replied to RobbeK
Hi Rob, many thanks!

Yes, i said the bit about not using RAW with "the tongue in the cheek", - an English phrase, means a kind of gentle irony !! What I meant was that I am astonished by what can come out of something the size of a cigarette packet ! And this by just using the built in algorithms - but for sure, RAW is the way to go.

I have been using this little camera and CHDK to play myself into a more digital world - and it's a good tutor. I have more or less decided on a Sony Nex-6 as my first "decent" digital camera _ I think a DSLR would not be quite my style! ;-(

About the ISO's, CHDK can go down to 10 ISO as built, but one could write a little script in, say, Lua, to go even lower, although I'm not certain that the camera would be able to make use of the instruction, in fact, I'm not exactly certain that the lower CHDK values are interpreted correctly either, but the end results are still very impressive. As I said before, you should get a little Ixus in a brocante and try this - you would be much better at it than I am !! ;-((

grtz,
Mike
2 years ago. Edited 2 years ago.
╰☆☆June☆☆╮
╰☆☆June☆☆╮
Your beautiful capture was admired in Historical & Architectural Gems.
www.ipernity.com/group/332973
2 years ago.
Mikeinlagardette has replied to ╰☆☆June☆☆╮
June, thanks for your encouragement!
2 years ago.