Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-12-2010, 06:11 AM   #1
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,225
K-x jpeg vs raw high iso question

On another forum it was posted that the K-x high iso in jpeg would beat the same in raw. Person used Bibble 5 for the raw processing and noise reduction. Said Bibble just loss detail and smeared the image. Not an apples to apples comparision.

If you use the Pentax supplied raw converter does the raw match or beat the jpeg at high iso?

thanks
barondla

Check out POINT & SHOOT CONTEST #32 in compact camera forum. Enter #33. Any brand camera. Enter now!

08-12-2010, 06:34 AM   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,563
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
On another forum it was posted that the K-x high iso in jpeg would beat the same in raw. Person used Bibble 5 for the raw processing and noise reduction. Said Bibble just loss detail and smeared the image. Not an apples to apples comparision.

If you use the Pentax supplied raw converter does the raw match or beat the jpeg at high iso?

thanks
barondla

Check out POINT & SHOOT CONTEST #32 in compact camera forum. Enter #33. Any brand camera. Enter now!
It is not clear to me what you are talking about....

What is it that JPEG is supposed to beat RAW with?:

- Resolution: impossible, RAW is the base data for JPEG, JPEG is compressed RAW and will therefore allways have less information.
- Noise: JPEG is likely to be better. With Noise Reduction on, JPEG images will show less noise, since RAW is unprocessed by definition.
- Dynamic Range: impossible again. At the best JPEG will be as good as RAW. You cannot get more DR in JPEG then was available in the original RAW (unless you go to HDR mode: use multiple RAW images to create 1 JPEG)
- Colour depth: impossible again. See previous argument.
- White Balans: by definition RAW is not processed towards a certain WB. Your software can use the camera settings, however it is compairing apples and pears.

Perhaps you can be more specific?

If we are talking noise, you should be aware that all noise reduction approaches will smear to some extend.
It is interpolation of the average colour, detail etc, surrounding the pixel NR is applied to.
A sort of anti-aliassing technique.

= Bert
08-12-2010, 07:22 AM   #3
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Person used Bibble 5 for the raw processing and noise reduction. Said Bibble just loss detail and smeared the image. Not an apples to apples comparision.

If you use the Pentax supplied raw converter does the raw match or beat the jpeg at high iso?
Tough question to quantify given the seemingly endless variables involved in what we'd consider RAW processing.
TBH. I can't speak for Bibble(very limited exposure myself), though Adobe Camera Raw and/or LightRoom 3x are far and away better than in camera processing. This holds true on a number of fronts(included) image grain).

Either way, it really comes down to ones capacity and understanding of RAW processing.
08-12-2010, 07:51 AM   #4
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
Programs don't smear detail; people do. The person using Bibble probably could have obtained better results were he more experienced in operating the controls.

08-12-2010, 10:41 AM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,812
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Programs don't smear detail; people do. The person using Bibble probably could have obtained better results were he more experienced in operating the controls.
Absolutely correct -

RAW has the potential of getting better results than the paired JPG.

But it really depends on the user -
if they can do their conversions, noise reduction, color balancing, brightness/contrast, sharpening - to name but a few, well.

Here in lies the problem -
JPGs straight out of the camera is usually what the manufacturer considers the "best" they can do under the constrains (operating speed and processing power) - RAW has the potential of doing better - since the user is not constrained by those things - but it depends on the skill of the user.

Users vary in their skills and judgment/tolerance - it's also open to opinion what is "better" and to whom?

Often I find for my usage it's hard to beat the JPG quality out of the K-x - I have tried - but caveat on limited number of paired RAW/DNG + JPG - shot under what I consider very extreme/difficult lighting conditions -
please see Modern LED Stage Lighting & photography problems

Where I did not start out to prove the superiority of DNG vs. JPG -
but merely to solve the extreme lighting problem using whatever means I had available -
and I often get the encouragement to use RAW to solve difficult problems -
well RAW did seem to do better at one point with what I considered a close to miraculous result - since neither ACR (Adobe Camera RAW) 5.6 nor LightRoom 3 Beta 2 - could manage anything near a natural looking result (see post #23).

Until much later - I realized I could apply the same processing from Pentax DCU 4.11 (the software supplied with the K-x) to the paired JPG - and lo-and behold I got similar results from the JPG! (post #101)

- not only that, after someone requested I post the DNG originals so others could attempt the corrections/adjustments and various corrections by others -- albeit with hindsight - I found I liked (by a very slight margin) the corrected JPG result the best (post #122) ........

But I fully realize that others may not agree with my opinion (and it is only my opinion) -

So it comes down to this - try processing a paired RAW+JPG using whatever processors of one's choice and see if one is better than the other - and if that is worth the extra effort - if any.....

In the end no matter what anyone says - the final judge is oneself - although we can all learn from others and we may not see what might be obvious to others - this is always useful to improve on one's output.
08-12-2010, 02:02 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Programs don't smear detail; people do. The person using Bibble probably could have obtained better results were he more experienced in operating the controls.
" probably could have" is the key phrase here. He probably could have BUT there is no guarantee. It heavily dependent on algorithm too. It might happen that the internal NR algorithm of kx might be different and better than Bibble algorithm.

And yes programs smear detail , people just use these programs.
08-12-2010, 02:39 PM   #7
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
If it was Bibble 5, it comes with Noise Ninja built in. I *know* that's capable of good results.
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!
apples, bibble, camera, dslr, forum, iso, jpeg, k-x, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-7 high ISO Performance RAW shang Pentax DSLR Discussion 28 07-04-2010 12:27 PM
K-7 HIGH ISO NR In RAW Christopher M.W.T Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 06-06-2010 05:19 PM
Are high ISO considerations based on jpeg or raw? justtakingpics Pentax DSLR Discussion 16 06-04-2010 08:32 AM
KX vs K7 in RAW HIGH ISO? Any real difference? Silat Shooter Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 12-03-2009 07:44 PM
K-7 high ISO + raw (pef) frmwr 0.35 lol101 Pentax News and Rumors 34 06-06-2009 06:40 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:22 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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