Does JPG count as PP?

[simico]

Originally Posted by foxglove

That's my point - every photo is processed.

Sorry, but this just proves how you and many others don't understand what "post processing" term means. Do you know what the word "post" means? It is something like "after", like "pre" is something like "before". Post mortem means after death. Post processing means after processing, i.e. something done after a previous (main) processing. There's no post processing if there wasn't any (main) processing before that, just how you cannot be the second child of your parents if you're the only child they ever had, just how you cannot be the second in a race if you are the only one racing.

Sure every photo taken by a digital camera is processed in the camera. That is the main processing. Everything you do with the image after that is post processing.
The main image processing starts with photons hitting the photosites and ends with the resulting data stream written to storage - the format of the data stream (JPG, TIFF, PEF, etc) and what steps were included in or left out from the processing doesn't matter. The main processing is done by the camera totally automatically and you have no direct control over it. You can set some parameters (WB, file format, etc) affecting the processing and the result before the actual processing starts, but you cannot change them during processing, you cannot revert them after processing, you cannot intervene during processing. You can also decide to take some processing steps out of the main processing and do those yourself in post processing.

So if I select JPG output file format then the camera does all the adjustments (WB, contrast, saturation, sharpening, etc), conversion and compression as part of the main image processing. Just how if I order my new car with all the extra bells and whistles (air conditioner, airbags, tempomat, cd changer, parking assistant, etc) then building them in at the factory is part of the main production process. However I can also decide to get a (more or less) raw output from the main processing and do all the adjustments later myself in post processing, just how I can order a basic car without any extra bells and whistles and then building them in by myself will be post production activity Don't let yourself be mistaken by the fact that you can move some steps between main processing (man factory production) and post processing (post production). Just because you can also build a GPS in to your car at home doesn't mean that building it in at the factory is also post production.

So, you just have to think about the meaning of these terms and the logic behind them. If you just take one word out of it and take it literally then you'll end up with weird ideas, like waiting for animals to fall from the sky when "it's raining cats and dogs"
Of course, all this is still just imho.

[Lowell Goudge]

Originally Posted by simico

The main image processing starts with photons hitting the photosites and ends with the resulting data stream written to storage - the format of the data stream (JPG, TIFF, PEF, etc) and what steps were included in or left out from the processing doesn't matter. The main processing is done by the camera totally automatically and you have no direct control over it. You can set some parameters (WB, file format, etc) affecting the processing and the result before the actual processing starts, but you cannot change them during processing, you cannot revert them after processing, you cannot intervene during processing. You can also decide to take some processing steps out of the main processing and do those yourself in post processing.

This is not entirely true. If you shoot raw, you can do in camera conversion to JPEG AFTER the image capture, and you can adjust contrast, saturation, WB, sharpness all in camera.

So if I select JPG output file format then the camera does all the adjustments (WB, contrast, saturation, sharpening, etc), conversion and compression as part of the main image processing..

see above, this only applies if you write direct to JPEG and do not do a raw to jpeg conversion in camera AFTER the fact.

I do agree, as you will note by my previous post, that if you shoot direct to JPEG this is not post processing.

[debbie]

Originally Posted by simico

Sure every photo taken by a digital camera is processed in the camera. That is the main processing. Everything you do with the image after that is post processing.

So if I select JPG output file format then the camera does all the adjustments (WB, contrast, saturation, sharpening, etc), conversion and compression as part of the main image processing.

I cant see any difference in getting your camera doing the raw conversion instead of your computer.

[Lowell Goudge]

Originally Posted by debbie

I cant see any difference in getting your camera doing the raw conversion instead of your computer.

My only observation here, is
- whether you shoot ONLY JPEG and made your selections before taking the shot

or

- whether you do the conversion in camera after shooting raw, on a file by file basis,

in the latter case there is no difference between in camera and in computer, both are post processing.


In the former case, you are making specific decisions about how you want the image to look before exposure, to me, that is the same as with film, adding filters in front of a lens, or changing films for specific color balance, color tint, etc, and is part of the "art" of taking photos.

[schmik]

Originally Posted by foxglove

Raw "soon to be obsolete"? Have I missed something? I don't pay much attention to the techie end of things much of the time, but... what?
Julie

Julie.... don't worry. Just another lame attempt at humor on my behalf. I was implying that RAW (being unprocessed) requires too much work for some and will be obsolete like film. Not that film is really obsolete and not that it is likely that RAW will die either.



Is RAW really processed? I was under the impression that it was just interpreted and displayed by a program.

BTW, I like the concept of Pre P.

BTW, i believe that in the K7 you can PP a JPG. While the Raw is still in the buffer you can see the image on the LCD and change WB and other params and it gets written to card.

mike

[Lowell Goudge]

Originally Posted by schmik

BTW, i believe that in the K7 you can PP a JPG. While the Raw is still in the buffer you can see the image on the LCD and change WB and other params and it gets written to card.

mike

Mike

don't know about the K7 but the WB adjustment works like that on K10. Take a shot, and while it is still in the bufer, you can make changes and see the impact. Too late for the shot just taken, but settings applied to all future shots

[HGMonaro]

Originally Posted by schmik

Anyway... it's not really all that important just wondered what others thought. BTW, i think this was inspired by all the measurbating about the k7 beta camera.

mike

Mike, I'm glad this issue wasn't that important to you.... after reading the responses I had to go back and re-read your question to see what could get so many knickers in a knot!

I'm with Lowell mostly. I'd almost class RAW->JPG by the computer as a "conversion" although this is not 100% as you might purposely apply some effect at this point.

To me, post processing implies making a conscious decision to alter something (whether it be applied to the whole image or to part of it). How the camera is setup (sharpness, contrast, WB, aperture, shutter speed, iso, focal length, etc) to capture light are parameters of how that image is captured.

Cheers, Nige

[Damn Brit]

Originally Posted by Lowell Goudge

You guys (& gals) have it all wrong.

JPEG right out of the camera is NOT post processing but pre processing.

I will make this a little clearer. Let's separate JPEG conversion done to raw images, but done in camera, that is post processing, BUT if you only shoot JPEG, you are not post processing but pre-processing because you are making your decisions before you shoot.

I'm going to argue that point (just for the sake of it). I'd say it was pre post processing. You're making the decision before you shoot as to what to do after you shoot.

[marcdsgn]

Originally Posted by Damn Brit

I'd say it was pre post processing..

Isn't "pre-post-processing" just processing?

Just like today is yesterday's tomorrow.

[Damn Brit]

Originally Posted by marcdsgn

Isn't "pre-post-processing" just processing?

Just like today is yesterday's tomorrow.

It's all 'just processing'.

[simico]

Originally Posted by Lowell Goudge

This is not entirely true

That is entirely true. Read below further.

If you shoot raw, you can do in camera conversion to JPEG AFTER the image capture, and you can adjust contrast, saturation, WB, sharpness all in camera.

So what? If you shoot raw then main processing finished with storing the data stream in raw file format. Whatever further processing you do with that raw file is post processing, it doesn't matter if you manually do it in the cam (raw development from play menu) or on your computer.

Once again: image processing begins with light (as input) hitting the sensor and ends with the resulting data stream (output) written to storage (let it be memory or storage card or whatever). The format of the output (whether raw, jpg, tiff or whatever) and what you do with it after all doesn't matter. The boundaries of processing is start processing with input and end processing with output. Everythign else is either pre or post processing, regardless of when and where you do it.

[Lowell Goudge]

Originally Posted by simico

...So what? If you shoot raw then main processing finished with storing the data stream in raw file format. Whatever further processing you do with that raw file is post processing, it doesn't matter if you manually do it in the cam (raw development from play menu) or on your computer.

Once again: image processing begins with light (as input) hitting the sensor and ends with the resulting data stream (output) written to storage (let it be memory or storage card or whatever). The format of the output (whether raw, jpg, tiff or whatever) and what you do with it after all doesn't matter. The boundaries of processing is start processing with input and end processing with output. Everythign else is either pre or post processing, regardless of when and where you do it.

But you missed the point I have been making since the beginning.

I have never disagreed with the fact that if you shoot raw, and make conversions to JPEG after the fact, that this is post processing.

My argument is that if you shoot JPEG only, this is not post processing because your image is stored as per your settings, you have no going back, because the RAW data is not stored.

[Lowell Goudge]

Originally Posted by Damn Brit

I'm going to argue that point (just for the sake of it). I'd say it was pre post processing. You're making the decision before you shoot as to what to do after you shoot.

Gary

SInce you are going to argue for the sake of it, then I, for the sake of it, so will I

this is like splitting hairs, but here goes.

Example 1

you shoot JPEG + RAW or if you make all the adjustments and your RAW editor carries these settings into the program (as some do) then I agree with you, it is pre-post processing, because you have decided this is how you are going to display the image before you shoot, but you make the changes after. Note you also still have the origonal file so if you don't like it you can also make different changes after.

Example 2

You shoot JPEG only. In this case, your selections go to directly modify the file that is saved. in the same manner as putting filters on your lens. The saved data is modified irreversably, and to a large extent the JPEG is the finsihed image. You have no way to really go back and make significant changes without re-shooting. Just like film

[georgweb]

You know I'm no PP, yeah you know me...
" " " " " " " " " " " " , cause I got a K100D :-)

Hey Mike,
regarding your complaining about dubious out-of-the-camera labeling, you probably know this by checking EXIF-data, right? If in doubt, check the EXIF .-)

I am using that label (flickr-tag) often, cause it's giving me better control over were I want to get to: An out-of-the-camera JPG which is already near perfect (no RAW if not necessary, i.e. daylight outside conditions). In theory this would also keep your film skills sharp, like Lowell mentioned.

Here's my "no PP" tags, which have some cropping involved mostly (if not then it's also 'OOC'): Flickr: geobeo's stuff tagged with nopostprocess. This is always sliders neutral and image: normal (not: 'bright'). I shoot almost only manual lenses in AV-mode and sure enough your initial remark about lens-bragging does apply to me also.

Best, Georg (the other)
PS: Even more out-of-the-cam and noPP

[foxglove]

Originally Posted by simico

Do you know what the word "post" means?

Of course I do - I think the problem here is the definition of processing.

Sure every photo taken by a digital camera is processed in the camera. That is the main processing. Everything you do with the image after that is post processing.
The main image processing starts with photons hitting the photosites and ends with the resulting data stream written to storage - the format of the data stream (JPG, TIFF, PEF, etc) and what steps were included in or left out from the processing doesn't matter.

I agree that the main processing involves processing the initial stream of information from the sensor. Where we differ, however, is what that processing involves - to me, the format of the data streams does matter. The PEF contains the basic information, but if you ask your camera to produce a JPG for you, it applies whatever settings you've specified, i.e., it processes the image, after (post) initial processing.

People are always using the analogy of the difference between sending your film off to be developed and printed, or doing it yourself, and although it's getting a little tired I think the analogy holds.

For those who take this really personally, I would like to say that I do not think one is better than the other. They're different approaches - you have a lot more latitude for messing around with a raw file, and if that's your thing, then you should shoot raw. If you think tweaking sliders is a total waste of time, you should work hard to get it right in the camera and shoot jpg.

I am thoroughly delighted when I open a raw file and find it needs nothing more than conversion to jpg, but I also get a lot of entertainment from tweaking, if it improves the output in my eyes. Using film, I never did my own colour processing (too many "sliders" to tweak!), but I spent hours dodging and burning b&w prints.

Just because you can also build a GPS in to your car at home doesn't mean that building it in at the factory is also post production.

Interesting analogy! I don't think it quite fits, but it's food for thought...

Of course, all this is still just imho.

Likewise!