Raw or JPEG

normhead · 11-20-2018, 10:37 AM

Yesterday was a challenging day for light. Grey, but one strip just over the horizon that looked like a sunset hung around all day. It took a RAW+ jpeg exposure. I did my best to create the best image from both the raw and the jpeg. So did Tess. Here are the results. I wasn't concerned with what I did to eat image, I was concerned with what can I accomplish with a given file using my PP software. (Aperture). Hence, I'm not really discussing what I hd to do to each one. Only what could be accomplished with each one. This is a typical, expose for the sky , rescue the shadows type of image.

Last edited by normhead; 11-20-2018 at 10:47 AM.

stevebrot · 11-20-2018, 12:10 PM

I cheated as to which is which and prefer #2 in regards to general appearance but will note that it was attained at the cost of a fair amount of artifact in the branches of the weeping willow (visible when viewing the uploaded original on Flickr). #1 is much cleaner overall.

Edit:
I changed my mind after looking at both with other than my laptop screen. #1 is now preferred.

Steve

DeadJohn · 11-20-2018, 12:12 PM

#2 seems to have too much blue, especially in the lower-left snow.

normhead · 11-20-2018, 12:40 PM

The best way to look at them is to click on one to open flicker, then toggle back and forth between the two.

**FozzFoster** · 11-20-2018, 12:54 PM

#2 looks like an overly processed image and that's why I voted for it being the jpeg.
#2 looks too saturated and the details are muddled because of that.

#1 looks way better and more natural. The snow is white and not blue at least.

**BigMackCam** · 11-20-2018, 12:58 PM

I went for #1 as raw, #1 as preferred.

But, as we've often discussed on these forums many times, viewed at appropriate sizes and from sensible distances, both images look good and work just fine. It's only when you zoom into them that you start to see the results of JPEG artefacts and/or post-processing. And no-one except us photographers actually views photos that way (thank goodness)

TonyW · 11-20-2018, 01:18 PM

Difficult to say as both of course have to be JPEG renderings and it would be possible to manipulate (to a degree) any way you choose.

I am going to take a guess that No1 is actually from the raw capture and No2 is your JPEG SooC. My reasoning is that in the first image you have kept sky tones from yellow to red (unless you have manipulated on purpose :-)) and the trees look natural.

It seems to me possible that the colour information in No 2 in this area has been dropped by the JPEG in camera conversion (or been edited out?).

My preference would be for the first image as I do not like blue snow (although I have been warned against eating yellow snow!) and there is more of a 3d feeling to the subject with this particular rendering choice

**GUB** · 11-20-2018, 01:49 PM

Prefer this one

**MetteHHH** · 11-20-2018, 02:10 PM

This is an excellent demonstration of why I will never, ever go back to shooting jpg!

I feel sorry for the poor flattened tree and the poor blue shadows - being able to pp white balance and correct details of the exposure is really the key to good post processing, in my view.

**GUB** · 11-20-2018, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by MetteHHH

This is an excellent demonstration of why I will never, ever go back to shooting jpg!

I feel sorry for the poor flattened tree and the poor blue shadows - being able to pp white balance and correct details of the exposure is really the key to good post processing, in my view.

I wouldn't count on it being that way round. The one with white snow has badly clipped reds in the sky which is very much an incamera jpg thing. And the jpg engines are very capable at applying colour temp and custom image so could do the white snow easily. All I know is I would far rather edit this type of image from the raw.

MarkJerling · 11-20-2018, 03:40 PM

I have voted and not commented. I would love to find out which was which and what you did with them Norm.

**GUB** · 11-20-2018, 03:48 PM - **1 Like**

The point is either could have been the in camera jpg. It all depends on the human input of parameters in either the camera settings or the editor settings. That is why we have tended to move towards opinions. The difficulty of the subject is I suspect a tension between the colour of the snow and keeping the tonal range of the sky. increasing the colour temperature or wb to neutralise the snow will tend to fry the sky. To get both may not be possible by adjusting the image globally. That is the strength of having it in raw and doing two renditions and merging the two. At least that would be the darktable / Gimp way. It is a great base shot Norm and i repeat I would much prefer to have it as a raw to work on if it was mine. But I won't tick the boxes above as it is a pointless guess.

**BigMackCam** · 11-20-2018, 04:07 PM - **5 Likes**

Norm - further to my earlier response, and with all due respect, I think a fundamental difficulty with your poll may be this: We're not actually being asked to vote on raw vs JPEG as billed in the thread title, but on your personal processing of raw and JPEG files - which might be your best results based on your own post-processing tastes, software, PP skills, monitor(s) etc., but we all know how subjective post-processing can be, right? On that basis, it's more a case of which photo do we prefer and why, IMHO

tokyoscape · 11-20-2018, 04:13 PM

#1 will be a lot easier to deal with in the post-process for me. Therefore I like it more, and I think it is a raw file.

LensBeginner · 11-20-2018, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by BigMackCam

Norm - further to my earlier response, and with all due respect, I think a fundamental difficulty with your poll may be this: We're not actually being asked to vote on raw vs JPEG as billed in the thread title, but on your personal processing of raw and JPEG files - which might be your best results based on your own post-processing tastes, software, PP skills, monitor(s) etc., but we all know how subjective post-processing can be, right? On that basis, it's more a case of which photo do we prefer and why, IMHO

This.
RAW is only as good as the person who processes it, JPEG is only as good as the person who sets the camera*.

*I mean WRT in-camera jpeg-specific options, like highlight and shadow recovery, lens corrections, color profile, contrast, saturation, WB...

View Poll Results: which is the Raw and which do you like best
1 is the raw file.	35	61.40%
1 is the jpeg file	16	28.07%
I like one best	48	84.21%
I like two best	6	10.53%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 57. You may not vote on this poll

11-20-2018, 03:40 PM	#11
MarkJerling Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: May 2012 Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 20,405	I have voted and not commented. I would love to find out which was which and what you did with them Norm. Last edited by BigMackCam; 11-20-2018 at 03:47 PM. Reason: Removed deleted quoted post

11-20-2018, 03:48 PM - 1 Like	#12
GUB Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Wanganui Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,760	The point is either could have been the in camera jpg. It all depends on the human input of parameters in either the camera settings or the editor settings. That is why we have tended to move towards opinions. The difficulty of the subject is I suspect a tension between the colour of the snow and keeping the tonal range of the sky. increasing the colour temperature or wb to neutralise the snow will tend to fry the sky. To get both may not be possible by adjusting the image globally. That is the strength of having it in raw and doing two renditions and merging the two. At least that would be the darktable / Gimp way. It is a great base shot Norm and i repeat I would much prefer to have it as a raw to work on if it was mine. But I won't tick the boxes above as it is a pointless guess. Last edited by GUB; 11-20-2018 at 04:16 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
RAW+ vs. RAW vs. JPEG	StrasburgBarry	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	30	01-14-2018 07:27 PM
Different exposure between RAW and JPEG in RAW + JPEG - possible?	BigMackCam	Pentax DSLR Discussion	15	10-08-2016 01:50 AM
Raw + jpeg versus embedded jpeg	cpk	Pentax DSLR Discussion	20	12-23-2014 08:44 AM
JPEG, RAW, JPEG + RAW...huh?	Raptorman	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	14	12-22-2009 11:49 AM
RAW + JPEG with JPEG on One Star quality	laissezfaire	Pentax DSLR Discussion	58	12-10-2008 02:42 PM

11-20-2018, 10:37 AM	#1
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Raw or JPEG Yesterday was a challenging day for light. Grey, but one strip just over the horizon that looked like a sunset hung around all day. It took a RAW+ jpeg exposure. I did my best to create the best image from both the raw and the jpeg. So did Tess. Here are the results. I wasn't concerned with what I did to eat image, I was concerned with what can I accomplish with a given file using my PP software. (Aperture). Hence, I'm not really discussing what I hd to do to each one. Only what could be accomplished with each one. This is a typical, expose for the sky , rescue the shadows type of image. Last edited by normhead; 11-20-2018 at 10:47 AM.

11-20-2018, 12:10 PM	#2
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	I cheated as to which is which and prefer #2 in regards to general appearance but will note that it was attained at the cost of a fair amount of artifact in the branches of the weeping willow (visible when viewing the uploaded original on Flickr). #1 is much cleaner overall. Edit: I changed my mind after looking at both with other than my laptop screen. #1 is now preferred. Steve

11-20-2018, 12:12 PM	#3
DeadJohn Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: New York Posts: 4,833	#2 seems to have too much blue, especially in the lower-left snow.

11-20-2018, 12:40 PM	#4
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	The best way to look at them is to click on one to open flicker, then toggle back and forth between the two.

11-20-2018, 12:54 PM	#5
FozzFoster Custom User Title Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: Alberta Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	#2 looks like an overly processed image and that's why I voted for it being the jpeg. #2 looks too saturated and the details are muddled because of that. #1 looks way better and more natural. The snow is white and not blue at least.

11-20-2018, 12:58 PM	#6
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,669	I went for #1 as raw, #1 as preferred. But, as we've often discussed on these forums many times, viewed at appropriate sizes and from sensible distances, both images look good and work just fine. It's only when you zoom into them that you start to see the results of JPEG artefacts and/or post-processing. And no-one except us photographers actually views photos that way (thank goodness)

11-20-2018, 01:18 PM	#7
TonyW Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Posts: 706	Difficult to say as both of course have to be JPEG renderings and it would be possible to manipulate (to a degree) any way you choose. I am going to take a guess that No1 is actually from the raw capture and No2 is your JPEG SooC. My reasoning is that in the first image you have kept sky tones from yellow to red (unless you have manipulated on purpose :-)) and the trees look natural. It seems to me possible that the colour information in No 2 in this area has been dropped by the JPEG in camera conversion (or been edited out?). My preference would be for the first image as I do not like blue snow (although I have been warned against eating yellow snow!) and there is more of a 3d feeling to the subject with this particular rendering choice

11-20-2018, 02:10 PM	#9
MetteHHH Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,817	This is an excellent demonstration of why I will never, ever go back to shooting jpg! I feel sorry for the poor flattened tree and the poor blue shadows - being able to pp white balance and correct details of the exposure is really the key to good post processing, in my view.

11-20-2018, 03:07 PM	#10
GUB Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Wanganui Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,760	Originally posted by MetteHHH This is an excellent demonstration of why I will never, ever go back to shooting jpg! I feel sorry for the poor flattened tree and the poor blue shadows - being able to pp white balance and correct details of the exposure is really the key to good post processing, in my view. I wouldn't count on it being that way round. The one with white snow has badly clipped reds in the sky which is very much an incamera jpg thing. And the jpg engines are very capable at applying colour temp and custom image so could do the white snow easily. All I know is I would far rather edit this type of image from the raw.

11-20-2018, 04:07 PM - 5 Likes	#13
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,669	Norm - further to my earlier response, and with all due respect, I think a fundamental difficulty with your poll may be this: We're not actually being asked to vote on raw vs JPEG as billed in the thread title, but on your personal processing of raw and JPEG files - which might be your best results based on your own post-processing tastes, software, PP skills, monitor(s) etc., but we all know how subjective post-processing can be, right? On that basis, it's more a case of which photo do we prefer and why, IMHO

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-20-2018, 04:13 PM	#14
tokyoscape Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2018 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,256	#1 will be a lot easier to deal with in the post-process for me. Therefore I like it more, and I think it is a raw file.

11-20-2018, 04:23 PM	#15
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	Originally posted by BigMackCam Norm - further to my earlier response, and with all due respect, I think a fundamental difficulty with your poll may be this: We're not actually being asked to vote on raw vs JPEG as billed in the thread title, but on your personal processing of raw and JPEG files - which might be your best results based on your own post-processing tastes, software, PP skills, monitor(s) etc., but we all know how subjective post-processing can be, right? On that basis, it's more a case of which photo do we prefer and why, IMHO This. RAW is only as good as the person who processes it, JPEG is only as good as the person who sets the camera. I mean WRT in-camera jpeg-specific options, like highlight and shadow recovery, lens corrections, color profile, contrast, saturation, WB...