Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-08-2018, 05:16 PM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Ex Finn.'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,945
I am happy with the JPEGs that the KP produces. If I see something special then I hit the "save RAW+" button.

02-08-2018, 05:44 PM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 15,758
QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
Is it not the case though that even in Jpeg mode the camera still captures the image data in 14bits ? It's just that it doesn't get saved like that ...... rather it gets processed and compressed into 8bit. This is the same process we apply when saving out final Jpegs after RAW processing . Shooting in Jpeg mode doesn't mean we lose the advantages of a 14bit sensor, does it?
?

But that's the final output.

Before then, you are doing 14bits of shadow and highlight recovery, not 8.
02-08-2018, 05:55 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 351
QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
Shooting in Jpeg mode doesn't mean we lose the advantages of a 14bit sensor, does it?
If you're happy with the jpeg output straight from the camera, you don't lose anything. The 14-bit advantage only really matters of you want to adjust the picture after the fact.
02-08-2018, 06:03 PM   #19
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
pschlute's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Surrey, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,727
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
OK, there have been lots of RAW vs JPG debate, and technically, of course RAW will always be better.
In the hands of someone who has not learned the skills, or does not have the time to perform a good RAW conversion, that statement does not hold true.

RAW is not an image format. It has to be processed and converted to an image format such as jpeg or tiff. Whether you let the camera do that by shooting in jpeg or do it yourself is a choice only you can make.

02-08-2018, 06:13 PM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Ex Finn.'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,945
The KP JPEGs are pretty darn good!
Just saying...
edit: so are the RAW files.
02-09-2018, 01:04 AM   #21
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2013
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posts: 757
In photography what matters is the photograph. Does anyone look at a photograph and say, "What a great photo - it must be a skilful raw conversion by this photographer." No, because the observers probably don't know how it was produced. Every week at the club meeting we see wonderful images, some from raw files, some from JPEGs, and each of them edited in various ways by the photographer to enhance them to his/her own requirements. Our independent visiting judges rarely mention raw and JPEG in their image critiques; their top choices are sometimes photos that started as a raw file, sometimes as a camera JPEG. There really is a free choice between shooting in either the raw or JPEG file formats, it should not matter to anyone else which file format is chosen, and selecting one over the other does not in itself make someone a better photographer.
02-09-2018, 01:57 AM   #22
Insanely humble
Loyal Site Supporter
savoche's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lowlands of Norway
Posts: 17,798
QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
Is it not the case though that even in Jpeg mode the camera still captures the image data in 14bits ? It's just that it doesn't get saved like that ...... rather it gets processed and compressed into 8bit. This is the same process we apply when saving out final Jpegs after RAW processing . Shooting in Jpeg mode doesn't mean we lose the advantages of a 14bit sensor, does it?
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
But that's the final output.

Before then, you are doing 14bits of shadow and highlight recovery, not 8.
I'd say you lose quite a lot of the advantages of the 14 bit sensor by shooting jpeg, but not all. After all, what the camera does is processing the RAW file and as such utilising all the 14 bits (with all the in-camera corrections, highlight and shadow protection etc).

It's when you need to do any further processing of that jpeg that you will be severely limited.

02-09-2018, 02:05 AM   #23
Bui
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 316
Original Poster
Ok, great, a lot of great advice. I will follow you: keeping shooting in RAW, and invest more time in learning PP. I probably have to find opportunity to upgrade my PC a little bit (my wife won't like it), it's not an ancient one, but it's incredibly slow processing RAW. Does SSD really make a difference in speed?

---------- Post added 02-09-18 at 02:15 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
They are applied only to jpeg. And also the preview thumbnail inside the raw file. Some of these corrections require CPU power and therefore take longer to process. Photos will be recorded faster if you disable distortion correction, for example. I think the only two that get applied to raw are slow shutter NR (if you take long exposures, has menu option. generally useful, but doubles the time and we don't always have so much time available) and highlight correction (it shoots at a lower ISO than is stated, then raises it digitally without clipping of highlights).


True. Raw takes more time and more hard drive space. You can set up automatic PP and use presets and batch processing to speed things up. You need to add sharpening, NR, contrast, fix the WB, etc. You can get much better results from raw, much more room for correction. But it takes work and specialty programs. It gets confusing if you start with this before you have a firm grasp of the camera and photography basics. And each PP software is a bit different from the others. Some are really difficult to use, some are fairly simple (Lightroom is among the easier ones). Some offer features like cataloguing, sharing options, and others only do PP of individual photos

There is nothing wrong with starting out with jpeg.I think the forum has a recommended settings post for your camera. I would set the jpeg to film reversal (I like saturated colours), raise sharpening by one little line, customize the NR settings (keep it fairly low until ISO 3200, lowest setting at lowest ISO) and then use the most appropriate scene mode (some scene modes change the jpeg mode and sharpening. Some even have their own special customizable options). Learn from them. Then use more advanced modes like P and Av and Tv, experimenting, and getting results that are even better than scene modes. I think it is fine to use jpeg for your first 10000 photos, and then give raw another try.

KP is a great camera with lots of room for you to grow. You should enjoy it and all of photography. No need to do and force things that make you want to quit. There will be a natural evolution of your skills and wishes, give it time
Thank you for your comment. I use Av, TAv and P all the time. The KP doesn't have scene mode as far as I know. Since you mention it I would like to move the question further: when the scene changes, for instance from taking a portrait to taking a landscape, technically what do we need to keep in mind? Adjusting f-stop, shutter speed, ISO, modify WB if needed, what else?

Also, I think keeping everything in RAW, then converting all of them to JPG, only edit what is needed, seems a good idea, and good compromise between quality/workload. However I haven't been able to replicate what the camera produces in JPG vs what I convert using Lightroom. I mean if I edit each image individually I can make a much better photo, but I'm still searching for a good universal setting that I can use to converse all of my images to save time. I like what I see in the KP's JPG output, but I don't know how to replicate it in Lightroom. Does Lightroom has something like camera profile when it comes to conversion?
02-09-2018, 02:30 AM   #24
Insanely humble
Loyal Site Supporter
savoche's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lowlands of Norway
Posts: 17,798
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
Does SSD really make a difference in speed?
Yes. I think the four most important factors for speed are
- Enough RAM, in my experience minimum 8 GB but more is better.
- As fast a disk as possible. SSD>Internal HDD>External HDD. Keep (for LR) the catalog and cache on the fastest disk. Ideally the images, too, but as SSDs still are quite expensive that might not be possible/economical.
- CPU speed. I will probably upgrade my i5 CPU to i7 at some point as that seems to be the bottleneck on my system right now.
- Graphics card. Provided your PP software can utilise the GPU (LR can) you can speed things up with a fast GPU (and more memory, I suppose). Probably less to gain here than the three point above.

I have no empirical proof of what's more important of the above, but I have listed the factors in what I believe is descending order. I'm sure others will enlighten us if I'm talking rubbish
02-09-2018, 03:32 AM   #25
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2013
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posts: 757
QuoteOriginally posted by savoche Quote
It's when you need to do any further processing of that jpeg that you will be severely limited.
To include in your statement "any further processing" and "severely limited" is quite simply misleading and untrue. Assuming that a JPEG has been competently shot, and recorded in the camera at the best available quality (full resolution and lowest compression setting), it can be subjected to some quite strong adjustments (selective and/or whole-image) in post-processing, if necessary, to get to the final image for display or print, without any discernible impact on image quality. There are some limitations but, with regard to what is seen in typical viewing, they tend to apply only in the extremes - e.g. several stops of under- or over-exposure - which probably shouldn't have been allowed to occur anyway.
02-09-2018, 04:08 AM   #26
Insanely humble
Loyal Site Supporter
savoche's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lowlands of Norway
Posts: 17,798
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
Thank you for your comment. I use Av, TAv and P all the time. The KP doesn't have scene mode as far as I know. Since you mention it I would like to move the question further: when the scene changes, for instance from taking a portrait to taking a landscape, technically what do we need to keep in mind? Adjusting f-stop, shutter speed, ISO, modify WB if needed, what else?
Ahh, all down to taste I always leave WB in Auto since I shoot raw and always process my images anyway. But basic exposure is fairly straight forward.
- Use a sufficiently short shutter speed to avoid camera shake.
- Use short shutter speeds to freeze motion, slow speeds to get motion blur (e.g. running water)
- Use small apertures to get everything in focus, wide apertures for subject isolation.
- Keep your ISO low if you can, raise it if you must. Pretty much dictated by the above.

For landscapes: Small aperture and low ISO = slow shutter speed. Use a tripod. I use Av mode and manual ISO, or M mode.
Portraiture: Wider aperture to blur out the background ("subject isolation"). Low ISO. I'd use Av mode and manual ISO.
Action/sports: Fast shutter speed to freeze movement. Often this means letting the ISO go up. I'd use Tv or TAv mode.
Wildlife: For 300mm I like to use 1/500th or faster if possible, and f/8 or f/11 if possible to have some depth of field. Raise ISO if necessary. I almost always use TAv mode.

Btw, my two top tips for getting better images are
1) Be aware of what you don't want in your image. Your brain filters out that trash can in the background. Your camera doesn't.
2) Don't center your subjects ("Rule of thirds" is a good starting point).

QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
Also, I think keeping everything in RAW, then converting all of them to JPG, only edit what is needed, seems a good idea, and good compromise between quality/workload. However I haven't been able to replicate what the camera produces in JPG vs what I convert using Lightroom. I mean if I edit each image individually I can make a much better photo, but I'm still searching for a good universal setting that I can use to converse all of my images to save time. I like what I see in the KP's JPG output, but I don't know how to replicate it in Lightroom. Does Lightroom has something like camera profile when it comes to conversion?
Sounds to me you should shoot RAW+ and just use the JPEGs if you are happy with them. You'll have the raw files available should you need them. I don't think you will gain much by doing universal/generic changes to your images.

Of course, as with most things, the more you practice the better you get. Even though I process each image individually I don't spend many seconds per image for basic adjustments. When I get to an image that I feel deserves more attention, though, I can spend anywhere from a few minutes to half an hour on it.

If it's a quick snapshot of a pigeon in your back yard half an hour might be quite a lot of time. But if you have spent three weeks of your vacation to get that image of Taj Mahal, what's half an hour more
02-09-2018, 04:17 AM   #27
Insanely humble
Loyal Site Supporter
savoche's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lowlands of Norway
Posts: 17,798
QuoteOriginally posted by MrB1 Quote
To include in your statement "any further processing" and "severely limited" is quite simply misleading and untrue. Assuming that a JPEG has been competently shot, and recorded in the camera at the best available quality (full resolution and lowest compression setting), it can be subjected to some quite strong adjustments (selective and/or whole-image) in post-processing, if necessary, to get to the final image for display or print, without any discernible impact on image quality. There are some limitations but, with regard to what is seen in typical viewing, they tend to apply only in the extremes - e.g. several stops of under- or over-exposure - which probably shouldn't have been allowed to occur anyway.
All valid views. Getting it "right in the camera" is always a good start For the rest, I guess it boils down to what we think is "severely" limiting, what a "strong adjustment" involves etc.

I will stand by my statement quoted above. I find doing anything beyond fairly small changes to JPEGs to be very challenging compared to how pliable raw files are. To me that entails a severe limitation in this context.

That said, I have spent countless hours processing raw files, and not much time on JPEGs. It may well be that I'm simply not good enough at post processing JPEGs to get it right.
02-09-2018, 05:12 AM - 2 Likes   #28
Veteran Member
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,183
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
I mean if I edit each image individually I can make a much better photo, but I'm still searching for a good universal setting that I can use to converse all of my images to save time.
I was hoping the ones I wrote would be the universal ones. Or the ones the forum posts in the Recommended settings threads (can probably use Recommended settings from K-3 just fine, if PF didn't publish for KP)
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
I like what I see in the KP's JPG output, but I don't know how to replicate it in Lightroom.
The point is not to replicate it. In LR, you should get better than the jpeg output. Otherwise it makes no sense to use LR. This is why you can stick to jpeg for a while longer.
Silky Pix, the software that came with camera, has options to give you everything that the camera can do. The same PP can be chosen.

QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
Does Lightroom has something like camera profile when it comes to conversion?
Yes, LR has many things. Camera colour profile (Adobe, Embedded, custom. I use Embedded usually), colour space (does not affect colour, but changing between colour spaces can affect colours. Usually you want it to be set to the same one in camera and in software. sRGB is fine for internet usage). Then you have all the default processing, like adding contrast, saturation. WB is chosen by the camera, but can be chosen in software as well. This is a big pro of raw - you can change WB without any quality loss. With jpeg, you can't change WB as flexibly as it can degrade quality. But if you are happy with camera's WB and colours in jpeg, shoot jpeg
There are plenty of LR tutorials out there. IF you are serious about LR, start reading (or even watching youtube tutorials)
02-09-2018, 09:33 AM - 1 Like   #29
Bui
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 316
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
The point is not to replicate it. In LR, you should get better than the jpeg output. Otherwise it makes no sense to use LR. This is why you can stick to jpeg for a while longer.
Silky Pix, the software that came with camera, has options to give you everything that the camera can do. The same PP can be chosen.
If there is a way to make hundreds of photo after an outing look better than in-camera-jpg in a batch job, please let me know. I am able to make a photo better than the camera individually, however that goes with spending 2 minutes to forever (forgive my lack of skill)

Say I have a bunch of photos taken during the day, and I have 2 hours during the night to work on them. I would like to have at least the whole collection look decent as a start (I specifically mentioned the KP's JPG because I like how they look generally, so converting all replicating it would be a good start for me). Then I am only ready to spend some extra minutes on photos I really like, or feel like I can make them better. Can I make that workflow smarter? (Except learning more on PP, yes I will do that)
02-09-2018, 12:29 PM   #30
Veteran Member
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,183
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
If there is a way to make hundreds of photo after an outing look better than in-camera-jpg in a batch job, please let me know. I am able to make a photo better than the camera individually, however that goes with spending 2 minutes to forever (forgive my lack of skill)
That is where it starts! It takes long until you learn it
Usual workflow is this. I have a default set for NR (per ISO) and added sharpening, lens profiles, general stuff. Then make a selection, delete the bad photos, then make a selection of the "best" ones from that session and send a little more time on those. Right click, copy the Develop style, paste it on the other best ones and finally touch them up individually (like removing dust spots, fixing skin blemishes, tweaking the WB and other settings). That's how I get the photos in my gallery (sig). Are they better than in-camera? Maybe, maybe not, but I like them
No need to rush things. You can use Presets, even download them. But again, it takes time. Your photos won't be Ansel Adams quality in your first month of photography, and not even in the first year. but you will get photos better than smartphones and P&S cameras
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, correction, image, iso, jpeg, jpg, kp, lightroom, modes, output, pentax kp, photography, pp, question, questions, scene, skill, time, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KP vs K-70 - to KP or not to KP, that is the question OldChE Pentax DSLR Discussion 28 11-02-2019 05:29 AM
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs....... Steelski Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 2 06-28-2017 04:59 PM
RAW+ : How to apply JPG camera settings to RAW? raider Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 7 06-20-2015 07:21 PM
K-S2 JPG's versus K5ll JPG'S and K50 JPG's LoneWolf Pentax DSLR Discussion 22 03-28-2015 12:58 PM
RAW+ - JPG different from RAW? 7samurai Pentax DSLR Discussion 26 11-23-2010 08:36 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:40 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top