Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 11 posts | 
by jwild on Mon Dec 19, 2022 1:42 am
User avatar
jwild
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1634
Joined: 29 Aug 2008
Location: India
I've been using Canon R 5 for more than two years now. 
Recently, I landed in the discussion that the crop which is done by camera ( 1.6 crop in case of R 5) is better than the crop which is done by Photoshop or any other software, later on a computer. In other words if I take a full resolution image ( 8192x5464) and later crop is to same resolution as 1.6 X crop (5088x3392), the camera crop will have a better IQ, as it is done by hardware and not software.

I would be very keen to know your views !!!


Last edited by jwild on Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:31 am, edited 2 times in total.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Mon Dec 19, 2022 7:45 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86842
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Before commenting, I’d like to see the discussion, the reasoning, and the assumptions, the file type, etc. behind that statement…
 

by Dan Kearl on Mon Dec 19, 2022 5:21 pm
Dan Kearl
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1713
Joined: 6 Mar 2019
Member #:22021
A sensor has a certain number of pixels,, makes zero difference when or how the image is cropped. The pixels left over don't know the difference.
Image quality with the left over pixels  has way more to do with the Raw processor no matter whether the crop is in camera or in post processing.
A RAW image opened in Photoshop will look different than the same image opened in Capture one for instance.. That is where the difference is, not the cropping.


Last edited by Dan Kearl on Mon Dec 19, 2022 11:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 

by Mark L on Mon Dec 19, 2022 7:54 pm
Mark L
Forum Contributor
Posts: 148
Joined: 1 Feb 2020
The original poster seems to think that the crop in the camera is "hardware" while the crop on a computer is "software".  I don't know for sure, but I would be willing to bet that all are "software".  The camera sensor generates a bunch of numbers which the camera processor, or the computer that is processing the RAW file uses to generate an image.  As was stated by the second responder, cropping is simply selecting which numbers to use in the generation of the image.  
 

by jwild on Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:31 am
User avatar
jwild
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1634
Joined: 29 Aug 2008
Location: India
jwild wrote:I've been using Canon R 5 for more than two years now. 
Recently, I landed in the discussion that the crop which is done by camera ( 1.6 crop in case of R 5) is better than the crop which is done by Photoshop or any other software, later on a computer. In other words if I take a full resolution image ( 8192x5464) and later crop is to same resolution as 1.6 X crop (5088x3392), the camera crop will have a better IQ, as it is done by hardware and not software.

I would be very keen to know your views !!!

[font=Arial, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, sans-serif] I was thinking in terms of raw captures only and thought that crop, whether done by camera or later in post production shouldn't make much difference. Although when shooting with crop sensor, one may gain slightly in terms of better exposure and / or focus. But my friend was trying to convince me that camera does a better job, as it is done by hardware than any software. [/font]
 

by DChan on Tue Dec 20, 2022 1:56 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
jwild wrote:I've been using Canon R 5 for more than two years now. 
Recently, I landed in the discussion that the crop which is done by camera ( 1.6 crop in case of R 5) is better than the crop which is done by Photoshop or any other software, later on a computer. In other words if I take a full resolution image ( 8192x5464) and later crop is to same resolution as 1.6 X crop (5088x3392), the camera crop will have a better IQ, as it is done by hardware and not software.

I would be very keen to know your views !!!

Is that your hypothesis or you have done some experiments, taken some photos, and found that there are differences in terms of sharpness, color, tonal gradation, noise, etc, etc.? Just wondering what differences you actually saw between the two photos and if they're easily noticeable.

Personally if I and anyone else don't see any differences in real world situations, there is no difference no matter what it says in the lab ;-)
 

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:19 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86842
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
I wonder if they are confusing cropping vs small or medium sized RAW files. In the later scenario, some cameras will use a sophisticated downsampling scheme in camera to create the smaller RAW file which will have more detail than taking a full sized RAW file and then downrezzing. But just cropping should be the same. Downsampling should not be confused with cropping - just speculating that this is where the author got himself tripped up.
 

by jwild on Wed Dec 21, 2022 7:33 am
User avatar
jwild
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1634
Joined: 29 Aug 2008
Location: India
E.J. Peiker wrote:I wonder if they are confusing cropping vs small or medium sized RAW files.  In the later scenario, some cameras will use a sophisticated downsampling scheme in camera to create the smaller RAW file which will have more detail than taking a full sized RAW file and then downrezzing.  But just cropping should be the same.  Downsampling should not be confused with cropping - just speculating that this is where the author got himself tripped up.
Thanks friends !
Thanks EJ, I was waiting for your response !
No, I wasn't confusing cropping vs. small Raw crop. I always believed that camera crop & post production crop should give similar results, but two gentlemen were hell bent upon proving that camera crop gives better IQ.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Dec 21, 2022 2:32 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86842
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
jwild wrote:
E.J. Peiker wrote:I wonder if they are confusing cropping vs small or medium sized RAW files.  In the later scenario, some cameras will use a sophisticated downsampling scheme in camera to create the smaller RAW file which will have more detail than taking a full sized RAW file and then downrezzing.  But just cropping should be the same.  Downsampling should not be confused with cropping - just speculating that this is where the author got himself tripped up.
Thanks friends !
Thanks EJ, I was waiting for your response !
No, I wasn't confusing cropping vs. small Raw crop. I always believed that camera crop & post production crop should give similar results, but two gentlemen were hell bent upon proving that camera crop gives better IQ.
I wasn't referring to you as the author ;)  I was referring to the author of the theory that you were reporting on :)
 

by SantaFeJoe on Wed Dec 21, 2022 5:20 pm
User avatar
SantaFeJoe
Forum Contributor
Posts: 8640
Joined: 28 Jan 2012
Location: Somewhere Out In The Wilds
The following article discusses the subject. I think the video attached covers the subject fairly thoroughly. One thing I found interesting is that there is a difference between crop mode and the aspect ratios that are also available. Here’s the link:

https://oldgirlphotography.ca/2022/03/1 ... p-in-post/

Joe
Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.  -Pablo Picasso
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Dec 22, 2022 1:14 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86842
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
SantaFeJoe wrote:The following article discusses the subject. I think the video attached covers the subject fairly thoroughly. One thing I found interesting is that there is a difference between crop mode and the aspect ratios that are also available. Here’s the link:

https://oldgirlphotography.ca/2022/03/1 ... p-in-post/

Joe
What he says about the aspect ratios is true for systems like Canon and Fuji but is not true for systems like Nikon where the actual NEF file you get is the file that only has the pixels of the aspect ratio chosen.  At least that was the case with Nikon DSLR's - I have not owned a Nikon mirrorless camera.  Sony just brought different aspect ratios in RAW for the first time to the a7R5 and I haven't tested what the actual RAW file consists of yet.  Fuji offers many different aspect ratios but the RAW files contain all of the pixels from the full sensor readout.
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
11 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group