Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-08-2018, 03:53 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 316
Using KP: Raw vs JPG?

Hello,

As a KP user (which not much photography experience), I would like to ask you some questions regarding file format:

- The custom image profile in the camera (sharpening, color, etc) I set for Bright/Landscape/Portrai mode, are they applied to Raw output or not?

- The same question, but for in-camera correction e.g. distortion, CA ... are they applied to Raw output or JPG only?

- This is a more tricky question: I have tried shooting Raw for quite sometimes, however, the benefit is not so great, I haven't noticed a big difference between LR outputs of Raw or JPG (admittedly my PP skill is not that great). However, the time spent for processing has increased considerably, much higher than my liking.

OK, there have been lots of RAW vs JPG debate, and technically, of course RAW will always be better. However, since my requirement (and skill) are not that complicated, plus, we are talking about the Pentax KP, which was said to have very fine JPG image, I feel (or hope to feel), the gap between JPG and Raw has been shorten a lot since like 5 years ago. Is this true?

Photography is my hobby, but I don't have too much time for it. When I have, I prefer spending it outside to take photos rather than sitting hours in front of my computer, so I'm thinking of going back to JPG for simplifying my work process. Especially if the first 2 questions are true.

Please help to clear my mind :-)

02-08-2018, 04:07 AM - 1 Like   #2
Closed Account




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,694
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
- The custom image profile in the camera (sharpening, color, etc) I set for Bright/Landscape/Portrai mode, are they applied to Raw output or not? - The same question, but for in-camera correction e.g. distortion, CA ... are they applied to Raw output or JPG only?
Hi Bui, these settings/corrections are for jpeg only. As for the pro's/con's of PP, other members are much more knowledgeable than I am. Good luck.
02-08-2018, 04:53 AM - 1 Like   #3
Master of the obvious
Loyal Site Supporter
savoche's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lowlands of Norway
Posts: 18,309
As pjv says, all the correction settings are applied to JPEGs only. *)

JPEG vs RAW? I'd say do whatever suits you. If you're happy with the JPEGs then go for it. Nothing wrong with that.

Just be aware that if you should ever need to post process an image you will be very limited. E.g. if you got that once in a lifetime shot underexposed by three stops it would be trivial to fix in RAW, but probably not much to salvage in a JPEG. Small adjustments are mostly ok, though.

I believe the KP also has the ability to save the last image taken as RAW when shooting in JPEG-only mode. **) That could remedy the problem of that one shot you can't re-take (should it ever happen).

Edit:
*) The "highlight protection" setting is an exception - that one is applied to RAW as well
**) Yep, described on page 47 in the manual. In Payback you can press the Fx3/EV comp button to save the last image as RAW: "Saves the RAW data (only
when a JPEG image was taken and the data remains in the buffer)."

Last edited by savoche; 02-08-2018 at 05:03 AM.
02-08-2018, 05:41 AM - 2 Likes   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 351
I'll just add to what others have said.

Color, sharpness, etc. are applied and permanently 'baked in' with jpeg. When shooting raw, the settings don't impact the actual raw sensor data but they are recorded in the raw file. Most software will use those as a starting point when you first open the image. (for example, if your white balance was wrong it would look wrong in Lightroom at first, but be easy to fix.)

Highlight protection works by underexposing 1 stop and brightening the jpeg, so all the raw images taken with it enabled would need a 1 stop increase to reach 'correct' exposure ('correct' as decided by the camera's meter).

If you have a large enough memory card you can just shoot RAW +JPEG. If you're happy with the jpegs just delete the raw files when you get home, but you'll have the raw for post processing in case things don't come out quite right.

I'd also suggest trying the Natural color setting. On my K-3 Natural gives colors closest to what I've remember in person. (Bright overemphasized red/orange to much for my taste, especially in wood tones.)

02-08-2018, 07:23 AM - 1 Like   #5
Veteran Member
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,186
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
- The custom image profile in the camera (sharpening, color, etc) I set for Bright/Landscape/Portrai mode, are they applied to Raw output or not? - The same question, but for in-camera correction e.g. distortion, CA ... are they applied to Raw output or JPG only?
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).

QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
- This is a more tricky question: I have tried shooting Raw for quite sometimes, however, the benefit is not so great, I haven't noticed a big difference between LR outputs of Raw or JPG (admittedly my PP skill is not that great). However, the time spent for processing has increased considerably, much higher than my liking.
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

Last edited by Na Horuk; 02-08-2018 at 07:29 AM.
02-08-2018, 07:52 AM   #6
Pentaxian
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,479
Not every shot benefits from the same settings. I doubt there is any jpg that would not be improved with some form of PP even if only straightening, cropping and cloning - not counting exposure, contrast, blacks, or other values. Post-processing is the least time-consuming fraction of the entire process - going out, setting up, coming back, chimping, renaming, uploading, backing up, etc. I spend about 15 seconds on the basics.
02-08-2018, 08:49 AM   #7
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 51,584
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
- This is a more tricky question: I have tried shooting Raw for quite sometimes, however, the benefit is not so great, I haven't noticed a big difference between LR outputs of Raw or JPG (admittedly my PP skill is not that great). However, the time spent for processing has increased considerably, much higher than my liking.
Processing raw files can definitely become time-consuming, and compared to quick or automated processing, out-of-camera JPEG may be better. So if JPEGs are working out for you, by all means use them (or shoot in RAW+ to have that option available for when the OOC result is way off).

Once thing I'll add is that you have distortion corrections on (not the others), processing the image takes around a second longer, so your buffer fills up faster and your FPS drops. Be sure to disable it for action shooting


Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:
02-08-2018, 09:43 AM   #8
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by SpecialK Quote
I spend about 15 seconds on the basics.
...And for me, I only process the frames that appeal to me on first pass. The others I save for later.

QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
I haven't noticed a big difference between LR outputs of Raw or JPG (admittedly my PP skill is not that great).
Whatever difference you are seeing on import into LR is the camera's processing vs. LR's default import profile. A few notes on RAW conversion:
  • There are many ways to process the RAW data to a visible image. The RAW converter applies curves and color profiles appropriate for your camera.* A basic conversion (so-called "linear RAW") to TIFF is rather ugly.
  • What you see with initial RAW processing depends on the software used
  • If you had imported into PDCU (the software that came with the camera), the two would have been very similar since that software applies the custom image, lens corrections and other JPEG-only settings the same as for in-camera processing.
  • Although RAW converters other than PDCU do not respect the proprietary Pentax features, white balance settings are generally read from the EXIF metadata and applied in initial processing
Regarding RAW capture data vs. JPEG image:
  • RAW provides the full 14-bit output from the low-level processor in the camera
  • JPEG is always 8-bit
  • Bit depth influences what one can do in post-processing without gross artifact as well as the ability to modify tonal gradients, noise reduction, and color-space translation in a graceful manner. The difference is huge.
Regarding that last point, consider the new fad of considering sensor output from many cameras (your KP for example) as ISO-invariant. The theory is that one may safely intentionally underexpose by several stops at a low ISO and shift the curve to the right in post with much less noise than if the exposure had been made at higher ISO. To do so with full tonality and without artifact works much better if one has more data (more bits) to work with. By artifact, I mean stuff like banding or gross dithering in gradients or single-color regions. Gamut coercion also goes much easier with RAW, but that subject requires too much explanation for here.

As noted above, if JPEG shooting works for you, there is no shame in doing so. The only concern is if the in-camera processing does not fit with your intent/vision.


Steve

* I am not sure of the current level of Adobe support for the KP, but both the K-3II and K-1 are supported by multiple camera profiles in addition to "Adobe Standard". These are essentially equivalent to the in-camera custom image types ("bright", "natural", "vibrant", etc.).

Last edited by stevebrot; 02-08-2018 at 09:56 AM.
02-08-2018, 10:18 AM - 2 Likes   #9
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by Bui Quote
- This is a more tricky question: I have tried shooting Raw for quite sometimes, however, the benefit is not so great, I haven't noticed a big difference between LR outputs of Raw or JPG (admittedly my PP skill is not that great). However, the time spent for processing has increased considerably, much higher than my liking.
I rarely spend more than a minute processing my raw files. Select a preset, apply a micro-contrast filter to the subject, accentuate different parts of the photo.

When I have a photo like this...


I have applied different treatments to different areas of the photo. The sky uses different treatments than the reflected sky. The shadow treatment is usually lightened and has it's contrast and saturation bumped a little. There are probably 5 universal adjustments and another 5 spot adjustments. In jpeg you can achieve the universal adjustments, but that's not even half off what I do in a really good image.

I do agree with ou in that if you aren't going to learn PP, jpeg will be just as good for 90% of your images. (The 90% for which I do no further work after the initial exposure and the first selection of filter to use after import (which takes at most 15 seconds) That image is like a jpeg., However, for the 10% which are my best images, you can't touch them with a jpeg. But, the 10% that do benefit from additional treatment will often be you best images when you are done. Shooting RAW doesn't help you with your average image, it helps you with your top 10%.
02-08-2018, 12:13 PM   #10
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,897
Once you have some basic profiles set up, PP shouldn't take that long... sometimes it takes longer to find out what pictures I want to keep, than to process the ones I do want to process.

Having said that, in our "family" camera (a K-S1, which shouldn't be too different from the KP in terms of the Jpeg engine), I have it set for JPEG because my wife wants that. She doesn't want to learn to process RAW and she wants to be able to share pictures right away. So I came up with what I think is a good setup that allows me to take good looking pictures in JPEG mode:

- Auto White Balance
- Portrait Mode (I find it better than Natural mode as it has more punch and reduces the reds a bit, which ends up working well as Pentax usually has a bit too much reds anyway). I use this for everything, even landscapes. Portrait has that extra punch that I like but doesn't look as un-natural as the Bright setting.
- In the JPEG settings, +1 for Contrast, Saturation, High/Low Key and Sharpening. Sharpening set to Fine.
- Auto ISO set for 100-1600 usually but I can go to 3200 with no problems if I'm indoors.
02-08-2018, 01:53 PM   #11
Veteran Member
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,603
Based on what you have said about your experience and preferences, plus the point that you don't want to spend much time on processing photos , then Jpegs from the KP are clearly the best choice. I think you are probably right that the JPEG output quality has improved over the last 6 or 7 years.

I do think that you should experiment with the Custom Image settings, both presets and fine turnings, and make a positive choice and adjustment for each shooting scenario. Also you should be sure that you can optimise the White Balance settings also for each type of lighting and the conditions.

Also you need to learn up about the noise processing settings on the camera, and be sure they are well set for each situation ..... Eg the ISO range and intensities. Your highlight and shadow correction settings will also be important as well. I believe that all of these referred to camera settings must be carefully managed in order to be sure that you actually are getting the best out of the Jpegs the camera is capable of.
02-08-2018, 02:57 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 347
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
  • Bit depth influences what one can do in post-processing without gross artifact as well as the ability to modify tonal gradients, noise reduction, and color-space translation in a graceful manner. The difference is huge.
Regarding that last point, consider the new fad of considering sensor output from many cameras (your KP for example) as ISO-invariant. The theory is that one may safely intentionally underexpose by several stops at a low ISO and shift the curve to the right in post with much less noise than if the exposure had been made at higher ISO. To do so with full tonality and without artifact works much better if one has more data (more bits) to work with. By artifact, I mean stuff like banding or gross dithering in gradients or single-color regions.
(emphasis mine)

A pedantic note on "ISO invariance" -- the theory isn't necessarily that underexposing and pushing in post will produce less noise than shooting at higher sensitivity, but that at least it won't produce any more. The real reason you'd want to do this is to preserve as much highlight data as possible (= greater dynamic range), data that could be lost to clipping if you shot at higher ISO.
02-08-2018, 03:37 PM   #13
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by Scintilla Quote
(emphasis mine)

A pedantic note on "ISO invariance" -- the theory isn't necessarily that underexposing and pushing in post will produce less noise than shooting at higher sensitivity, but that at least it won't produce any more. The real reason you'd want to do this is to preserve as much highlight data as possible (= greater dynamic range), data that could be lost to clipping if you shot at higher ISO.
The reason I do it is to increase overall contrast.Under-exposre, contrasty images, over expose, flat images, just as true in digital as in film.
02-08-2018, 04:46 PM   #14
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by Scintilla Quote
A pedantic note on "ISO invariance"
My pedantic response is that I stand by my original description. My preference is to simply state what happens within the context of this thread. The workability of pushing 2-3 stops is heavily dependent on bit-depth and the depth of the shadows. The cliff (zero data recorded) comes sooner at 8-bits than at 14.


Steve
02-08-2018, 04:57 PM   #15
Veteran Member
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,603
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?

Last edited by mcgregni; 02-08-2018 at 05:06 PM.
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 6 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 05:36 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