Raw / Jpg

[nebgranny]

Good Day Everyone:
I am still confused about Raw verses JPG.
I just opened the files which are on my camera card. I had the camera set for shooting both RAW and JPG. I opened them within the software that came with my camera, Digital Photo Professional. I for the first time noticed the RAW file pictures are so much more crisp and clear than those in JPG.

Why is this the case and if raw shooting is this way , how do we save that file as it is ? If I convert it to jpg it will look like the jpg showing in my software program right? But if I send a raw file the place printing it declines it as they can not work with raw?? Can someone help with all of this raw file and shooting process please? Thanks Neb

[pixelzombie]

Re: Raw / Jpg

google is a very valuable tool these days:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/RAW-file-format.htm

http://www.photoxels.com/tutorial_raw.html

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm

[CJ Swartz]

Re: Raw / Jpg

... I am still confused about Raw verses JPG.
.... I had the camera set for shooting both RAW and JPG. I opened them within the software that came with my camera, Digital Photo Professional. I for the first time noticed the RAW file pictures are so much more crisp and clear than those in JPG.

Why is this the case and if raw shooting is this way , how do we save that file as it is ? If I convert it to jpg it will look like the jpg showing in my software program right? But if I send a raw file the place printing it declines it as they can not work with raw?? Can someone help with all of this raw file and shooting process please? Thanks Neb

Neb,

A jpg file from your camera is the same as a raw file except that it is partly EDITED by your camera according to the settings choices you have set on the camera for Sharpness: 0 to 7, Contrast: -4 to +4, Saturation: -4 to +4, and Color tone: -4 to +4. Perhaps you might like the jpg version better if you made a change in one or more of those settings in your camera. The raw file is not edited until you open it in an editor like Adobe Camera Raw or the Digital Photo Pro software that came with your Canon (I guess it processes raw files?). The reason we shoot raw is so that we can make changes according to our own taste instead of letting the camera (manufacturer) do the editing -- but with a fine DSLR like the XSi, the jpg files should be great also - once you have set the sharpness/contrast/and color the way you like them. The raw file may look different (after you edit it) from the standard jpg file because you can make more changes to it using your software. When you save it, you can save it as a Tiff file, a Photoshop file (psd) and you can save a copy as a jpg file if you need a jpg format version for some purpose. (Of course, we can't keep working on a jpg file and saving it as a jpg file without losing data so we only work on a psd or tif version).

From what I've read about the XSi, when you shoot "raw plus jpg", the jpg file is shot at the Large/Fine level rather than a reduced level, so the quality of the file should be quite good. Take a look at your settings for Sharpness/Contrast/Saturation/Color tone and write down where you have them set now - then make some changes and see how you like them.

Shooting raw just gives us some more leeway to make changes to color, exposure/ brightness / contrast etc. AFTER we shoot our subject. If conditions are good, and we set the camera for proper exposure, then the jpg setting will give us just as good a picture. Raw just gives us a bit more leeway, and comes in handy when conditions are not "normal" or we are worried that we are missing getting the exposure right and want to make some changes AFTER we shoot. I do like to shoot raw when I can so that I can fix my goofs later, but I also shoot in jpg format when I photograph the dogs at the pound because I have to upload the photos right away on their computer and they don't have raw editing software. I just try to get the photos "right" in the camera instead of waiting to fix them afterwards.

Does any of this help? Those links that pixelzombie posted are good, but they aren't videos and I know you prefer videos!

[nebgranny]

Re: Raw / Jpg

Thanks CJ. I should have stated that I do understand the fact that shooting raw gives us the opportunity to edit the file to our liking. What I could not understand is why when I was in DPP and viewing the two files, raw and jpg, the raw thumbnail looked so much better than the jpg. I will try and post a example of what I mean .

pixelzombie- Thanks for the links and I do know about googling and do so frequently, but as CJ knows I do prefer videos for optimal learning opportunities for a hands on visual learner. Neb

[nebgranny]

Re: Raw / Jpg

Here is what I was trying to figure out. If you look close you can see that the raw file looks much clearer than the jpg, and have not done a bit of editing to either. This is a screen shot I took from inside DPP and all the raw files look so much better than the jpg's when I open the program to do some editing. Thanks Neb

[CJ Swartz]

Re: Raw / Jpg

... If you look close you can see that the raw file looks much clearer than the jpg, and have not done a bit of editing to either...Neb

Hmmm. anyone have an idea about this? To my old eyes, the raw version DOES looks sharper, but that should NOT be the case, should it? The jpg file can be sharper than the raw file if the camera's settings are set to sharpen, but the unedited raw file would never be sharper than the in-camera edited jpg file. Is this something OTHER than sharpness that explains the difference in the look of these two images?

Neb, can you tell us what your camera setting is for sharpness? (There isn't a setting that makes a picture SOFTER than the raw file, is there?) Oh, what is your setting for Contrast also.

[Redeye_Mt]

Re: Raw / Jpg

I am not familiar with the program you are using, but I would check to see if is applying some sharpening right off the bat. Some raw converters apply sharpening automatically for you. I don't apply any sharpening in the raw conversion. I prefer to sharpen in my image editor.

Harold

[duwayne]

Re: Raw / Jpg

Your in-camera noise reduction might be set too high causing the fuzziness.


You might want to try this little experiment I did shooting RAW+JPEG with my Nikon D80. The first image of my six-man clock is the original RAW opened in Photoshop and saved as a jpeg.

I loaded the original RAW and original JPEG into Photoshop without any adjustment. I then moved the JPEG image onto the RAW image (as a separate layer) and set the blending mode to 'difference'. I put a Levels adjustment layer on top and increased the brightness until I could see any differences. The only thing that showed up was the in-camera noise reduction that had been applied to the JPEG image. I found no evidence of JPEG artifacts when viewed at 1600X. At 1600X the RAW version was sharper but contained more noise. My guess is that if you ran noise reduction on the RAW version it would be wash.

I attached a 300x crop to show the difference between the RAW (left) and JPEG (right).

So, assuming you will reduce the noise in the RAW image to the same level as the JPEG, from tha standpoint of JPEG artifacts and image sharpness I see no reason to shoot RAW. I do shoot RAW on special occasions when I need the additional color depth or might want to make major adjustment in exposure.