Making Your own bracketed exposures from a single raw file

different names (I don’t use sidecar .xmp files to store camera raw info)

What do you use?

Is there a workaround for this or do I just have to do it by hand….. Open the correctly exposed image and save as a psd, then return to the raw file reduce the exposure and open in photoshop to get my new "bracketed exposure" psd

AFIK, raws are never changed.

On Dec 3, 4:15 pm, "" wrote:

different names (I don’t use sidecar .xmp files to store camera raw info)

What do you use?

Is there a workaround for this or do I just have to do it by hand….. Open the correctly exposed image and save as a psd, then return to the raw file reduce the exposure and open in photoshop to get my new "bracketed exposure" psd

AFIK, raws are never changed.

Photoshop has two options…..

you either store raw adjustment info in the camera raw database or in sidecar xmp files

I know the raw files is never changed, but if I duplicate the file and rename it, how does photoshop "know" it is the same image

I know the raw files is never changed, but if I duplicate the file and rename it, how does photoshop "know" it is the same image

I had forgotten about the proprietary database. There is also a DNG option too that I debated when I first started working in ACR. I found this:

Camera Raw Database – Stores the settings in a Camera Raw database file in the folder Document and Settings/[user name]/Application Data/ Adobe/CameraRaw (Windows) or Users/[user name]/Library/Preferences (Mac OS). This database is indexed by file content, so the image retains camera raw settings even if the camera raw image file is moved or renamed.

http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Photoshop/11.0/WSD94FB319-761D-4 e9a-BC8D-24DF7EBC05B4.html

You may be forced to change your workflow to the sidecar or DNG method.

johnnyblain wrote:

Hi All,

This is probably going to be on of those things that turns out to be obvious but here we go……

I do a lot of interiors photography, and every so often forget to bracket an exposure in order to steal the windows from a under- exposure to add to a correct-exposure.

So what I am trying to find out is why if I make a duplicate of my raw file, and rename it differently does any change applied to one raw file take immediate effect on the other, even though they have different names (I don’t use sidecar .xmp files to store camera raw info)

Is there a workaround for this or do I just have to do it by hand….. Open the correctly exposed image and save as a psd, then return to the raw file reduce the exposure and open in photoshop to get my new "bracketed exposure" psd

Any Help greatly appreciated

Johnny

I often develop 2 versions of a RAW file. One with highlight preserved and the other with shadow/mid preservation and paste the results together, erasing the unwanted parts of one or the other image to produce what some people might call a HDR proto.

You cannot then save the results as a RAW or DNG file but 16 bit tiff will preserve all the file information for other programs to use. In practice, I often enlarge (printing to canvas or archival paper) images up to wall poster size.

I have never found saving in 8 bit JPEG produces any *less* quality that working directly from a RAW file and doing the enlargement from that. Few wide format or inkjet printers will show any detail outside 8 bit sRGB anyway.

On Dec 3, 7:48 pm, Jurgen wrote:

johnnyblain wrote:

Hi All,

This is probably going to be on of those things that turns out to be obvious but here we go……

I do a lot of interiors photography, and every so often forget to bracket an exposure in order to steal the windows from a under- exposure to add to a correct-exposure.

So what I am trying to find out is why if I make a duplicate of my raw file, and rename it differently does any change applied to one raw file take immediate effect on the other, even though they have different names (I don’t use sidecar .xmp files to store camera raw info)

Is there a workaround for this or do I just have to do it by hand….. Open the correctly exposed image and save as a psd, then return to the raw file reduce the exposure and open in photoshop to get my new "bracketed exposure" psd

Any Help greatly appreciated

Johnny

I often develop 2 versions of a RAW file. One with highlight preserved and the other with shadow/mid preservation and paste the results together, erasing the unwanted parts of one or the other image to produce what some people might call a HDR proto.

You cannot then save the results as a RAW or DNG file but 16 bit tiff will preserve all the file information for other programs to use.   In practice, I often enlarge (printing to canvas or archival paper) images up to wall poster size.

I have never found saving in 8 bit JPEG produces any *less* quality that working directly from a RAW file and doing the enlargement from that. Few wide format or inkjet printers will show any detail outside 8 bit sRGB anyway.

Thats pretty much exactly what I want to do also, although I can’t agree with "Few wide format or inkjet printers will show any detail outside 8 bit

sRGB anyway." with 16 bits (12 really) you are getting much smoother tonal transitions(4096 discrete tonal values as opposed to 256), certainly my fine-art prints onto hahnemuhle photo rag look better coming from a 16-bit tiff than from an 8 bit jpeg, esp shadow detail which has only 8 discrete tonal values for the lowest 1 ev of dynamic range)

I know you can’t save the results as new RAW file, but have you found a way to store two different "recipes" of raw settings for the same file, I have tried duplicating the files and renaming them as raw files, I have tried converting to a DNG and duplicating the files and I have tried duplicating the file and then converting it to dng but I can’t make photoshop show view the duplicate (re-named) as a whole new file.

as I have a very finely tuned workflow I am loath to disturb it… raw settings are just the very first step, if I have to open the raw file manually twice while saving in the interim to obtain two different images from the same raw file I’ll just not bother, I’m just interested to see if there is a workaround

Johnny

"johnnyblain" wrote in message

Hi All,

This is probably going to be on of those things that turns out to be obvious but here we go……

I do a lot of interiors photography, and every so often forget to bracket an exposure in order to steal the windows from a under- exposure to add to a correct-exposure.

So what I am trying to find out is why if I make a duplicate of my raw file, and rename it differently does any change applied to one raw file take immediate effect on the other, even though they have different names (I don’t use sidecar .xmp files to store camera raw info)

Is there a workaround for this or do I just have to do it by hand….. Open the correctly exposed image and save as a psd, then return to the raw file reduce the exposure and open in photoshop to get my new "bracketed exposure" psd

Any Help greatly appreciated

Johnny

In CS3, create a new blank document the same size as your images.

Then go to File > Place, select your RAW file, make ACR adjustments for correct exposure of outside window. Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

Repeat the above (File > Place, etc.), but make ACR adjustments for correct exposure for interior. Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

You now have two versions of your RAW file in one document, on separate layers, as Smart Objects, which you can tweak as you wish, use layer masks, etc. As they are Smart Objects, you can click on the smart objects icons on the individual layers at any time and re-adjust the exposures independent of each other.

Allen Smithee wrote:

Then go to File > Place, select your RAW file, make ACR adjustments for correct exposure of outside window. Click OK, when it opens press Enter.
Repeat the above (File > Place, etc.), but make ACR adjustments for correct exposure for interior. Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

That is my normal workflow for tone mapping. I got caught up in the details and didn’t even think about that. Thanks.

On Dec 4, 1:39 am, "" wrote:

Allen Smithee wrote:

Then go to File > Place, select your RAW file, make ACR adjustments for correct exposure of outside window.  Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

Repeat the above (File > Place, etc.), but make ACR adjustments for correct exposure for interior.  Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

That is my normal workflow for tone mapping. I got caught up in the details and didn’t even think about that. Thanks.

I get all of that… however my workflow is based around establishing the correct ACR settings for each file.. then they go onto a droplet to create psd’s, which get tweaked then onto another droplet to generate 16-bitt tiffs, so if I have to manually open some files it totally disrupts that process…. It’s not that much of a pain to do, but it’d be great if I could find a way to make photoshop think that a copy of the raw file is an independent raw file which has it’s own set of settings

johnny

johnnyblain wrote:

On Dec 4, 1:39 am, "" wrote:

Allen Smithee wrote:

Then go to File > Place, select your RAW file, make ACR adjustments for correct exposure of outside window. Click OK, when it opens press Enter. Repeat the above (File > Place, etc.), but make ACR adjustments for correct exposure for interior. Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

That is my normal workflow for tone mapping. I got caught up in the details and didn’t even think about that. Thanks.

I get all of that… however my workflow is based around establishing the correct ACR settings for each file.. then they go onto a droplet to create psd’s, which get tweaked then onto another droplet to generate 16-bitt tiffs, so if I have to manually open some files it totally disrupts that process…. It’s not that much of a pain to do, but it’d be great if I could find a way to make photoshop think that a copy of the raw file is an independent raw file which has it’s own set of settings

johnny

One of the reasons forensic identification of RAW digital files is possible is because some of the RAW code is locked under patents or whatever and the file is permanently ‘branded".

PS and other programs use this branding to identify files. Even when you alter a RAW file and save it as two separate DNG (RAW in drag) files, PS will still recognize it is the same file. Manual alteration as previously described by others is the present solution.

On Dec 4, 1:33 pm, Jurgen wrote:

johnnyblain wrote:

On Dec 4, 1:39 am, "" wrote:

Allen Smithee wrote:

Then go to File > Place, select your RAW file, make ACR adjustments for correct exposure of outside window.  Click OK, when it opens press Enter. Repeat the above (File > Place, etc.), but make ACR adjustments for correct exposure for interior.  Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

That is my normal workflow for tone mapping. I got caught up in the details and didn’t even think about that. Thanks.

I get all of that… however my workflow is based around establishing the correct ACR settings for each file.. then they go onto a droplet to create psd’s, which get tweaked then onto another droplet to generate 16-bitt tiffs, so if I have to manually open some files it totally disrupts that process…. It’s not that much of a pain to do, but it’d be great if I could find a way to make photoshop think that a copy of the raw file is an independent raw file which has it’s own set of settings

johnny

One of the reasons forensic identification of RAW digital files is possible is because some of the RAW code is locked under patents or whatever and the file is permanently ‘branded".

PS and other programs use this branding to identify files. Even when you alter a RAW file and save it as two separate DNG (RAW in drag) files, PS will still recognize it is the same file. Manual alteration as previously described by others is the present solution.

Is it checksumed or something? If you went in with a hex editor and monkeyed around would Adobe recognize that?

wrote:

On Dec 4, 1:33 pm, Jurgen wrote:

johnnyblain wrote:

On Dec 4, 1:39 am, "" wrote:

Allen Smithee wrote:

Then go to File > Place, select your RAW file, make ACR adjustments for correct exposure of outside window. Click OK, when it opens press Enter. Repeat the above (File > Place, etc.), but make ACR adjustments for correct exposure for interior. Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

That is my normal workflow for tone mapping. I got caught up in the details and didn’t even think about that. Thanks.

I get all of that… however my workflow is based around establishing the correct ACR settings for each file.. then they go onto a droplet to create psd’s, which get tweaked then onto another droplet to generate 16-bitt tiffs, so if I have to manually open some files it totally disrupts that process…. It’s not that much of a pain to do, but it’d be great if I could find a way to make photoshop think that a copy of the raw file is an independent raw file which has it’s own set of settings
johnny

One of the reasons forensic identification of RAW digital files is possible is because some of the RAW code is locked under patents or whatever and the file is permanently ‘branded".

PS and other programs use this branding to identify files. Even when you alter a RAW file and save it as two separate DNG (RAW in drag) files, PS will still recognize it is the same file. Manual alteration as previously described by others is the present solution.

Is it checksumed or something? If you went in with a hex editor and monkeyed around would Adobe recognize that?

I guess it’s all time/effort/cost/return stuff. The OP wants a way to automate it (don’t we all) and it won’t happen at this stage of digital image development.

"johnnyblain" wrote in message

Then go to File > Place, select your RAW file, make ACR adjustments for correct exposure of outside window. Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

Repeat the above (File > Place, etc.), but make ACR adjustments for correct
exposure for interior. Click OK, when it opens press Enter.

That is my normal workflow for tone mapping. I got caught up in the details and didn’t even think about that. Thanks.

I get all of that… however my workflow is based around establishing the correct ACR settings for each file.. then they go onto a droplet to create psd’s, which get tweaked then onto another droplet to generate 16-bitt tiffs, so if I have to manually open some files it totally disrupts that process…. It’s not that much of a pain to do, but it’d be great if I could find a way to make photoshop think that a copy of the raw file is an independent raw file which has it’s own set of settings

In that case, as mentioned by ronviers, it sounds like you may be forced to change your workflow so that your RAW settings are stored in the sidecar or DNG file itself, instead of using the built in database (unless someone else can think of another work-a-round).

I have always stayed away from the proprietary database, therefore any changes I make to a DNG RAW file is stored in the file itself. Therefore I can duplicate a RAW file, make whatever adjustments I want to each file and the changes remain totally independent of each other.

Okay so, it seems like the checksum includes the suffix, so I have a workaround….

If I just use dng converter on the original file it seems to fool ps into thinking they are different files as the suffix’s are different,

so

example.cr2 and example copy.cr2 doesn’t work

example.dng and example copy.dng doesn’t work

example.cr2 and example.dng does allow you to assign different raw setting to the same source file

All that remains for me to maintain my workflow is to call the example.dng something else, as if the prefix is the same then I will simply overwrite the first output of my droplet (example.psd) with the second (also example.psd)

So all is good here

J

"johnnyblain" wrote in message

Okay so, it seems like the checksum includes the suffix, so I have a workaround….

If I just use dng converter on the original file it seems to fool ps into thinking they are different files as the suffix’s are different,
so

example.cr2 and example copy.cr2 doesn’t work

example.dng and example copy.dng doesn’t work

example.cr2 and example.dng does allow you to assign different raw setting to the same source file

All that remains for me to maintain my workflow is to call the example.dng something else, as if the prefix is the same then I will simply overwrite the first output of my droplet (example.psd) with the second (also example.psd)

So all is good here

Your workflow seems to suck more than a Dyson wired into the national grid.

On Dec 9, 1:32 pm, "Allen Smithee" wrote:

"johnnyblain" wrote in message

Okay so, it seems like the checksum includes the suffix, so I have a workaround….

If I just use dng converter on the original file it seems to fool ps into thinking they are different files as the suffix’s are different,

so

example.cr2 and example copy.cr2      doesn’t work

example.dng and example copy.dng    doesn’t work

example.cr2 and example.dng does allow you to assign different raw setting to the same source file

All that remains for me to maintain my workflow is to call the example.dng  something else, as if the prefix is the same then I will simply overwrite the first output of my droplet (example.psd) with the second (also example.psd)

So all is good here

Your workflow seems to suck more than a Dyson wired into the national grid.

Well, I suppose it’s better than blowing!

"johnnyblain" wrote in message
On Dec 9, 1:32 pm, "Allen Smithee" wrote:

"johnnyblain" wrote in message

Okay so, it seems like the checksum includes the suffix, so I have a workaround….

If I just use dng converter on the original file it seems to fool ps into thinking they are different files as the suffix’s are different,

so

example.cr2 and example copy.cr2 doesn’t work

example.dng and example copy.dng doesn’t work

example.cr2 and example.dng does allow you to assign different raw setting to the same source file

All that remains for me to maintain my workflow is to call the example.dng something else, as if the prefix is the same then I will simply overwrite the first output of my droplet (example.psd) with the second (also example.psd)

So all is good here

Your workflow seems to suck more than a Dyson wired into the national grid.

Well, I suppose it’s better than blowing!

I get it now. I couldn’t work out why you were going to such lengths, but looking back at your original post it seems you will only do this for occasional photos where you forget to bracket. So, I would imagine you are trying to keep everything consistent with how you normally shoot.

I get it now.  I couldn’t work out why you were going to such lengths, but looking back at your original post it seems you will only do this for occasional photos where you forget to bracket.  So, I would imagine you are trying to keep everything consistent with how you normally shoot.

That’s exactly it… If I am shooting a full spherical virtual tour I can have upwards of a thousand images to process for one job (72 images per view) if I have to trawl though and re-edit raw settings it can be a pain