Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Showing results 1 to 21 of 21 Search:
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-25-2019, 06:51 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Thank you for the kind words :o Of course here you all mostly see my good stuff, I can still take my fair share of duds! :lol:

I dunno... there's just a certain attraction to shooting Jpg, never really worry about buffer any more, small file sizes, even LR loads and edits them quicker on my machine and a bit of WYSIWYG is kinda comforting to know at the time whether you're managing things properly. In the past I used to gasp at the image I caught back of the screen and mutter to myself "Ach... it's ok.. I'll sort that in post" :D
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-25-2019, 04:50 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Because I am at that place where I'm not sure I will stay RAW or toggle over to Jpg. Currently I use the RAW button on my K-1 and toggle between RAW and Jpg (writing to both SD cards). But there are times I hit the buffer in RAW and thus try and predict this and toggle out and into Jpg (such as during the wedding last week, AF.C bursting for flower girl, and then after her maid of honour, and then father and bride etc.

I'm getting my settings working so well in camera these days I'm starting to question just how much breathing space I need for editing, I mean it's not like you can't edit a Jpg!

Take for example this SOOC (not a complete SOOC, I mean I used the in camera raw development of the RAW file and added vignette from the Digital Filter, but really this is a SOOC, no LR or post processing on a computer whatsoever);

And now an edit of the same shot from the RAW file in LR;

Not that much better, if at all! And I think I could have easily driven the Jpg to look like this if I tried.

But the point is, I knew when I took the shot RAW from judging the back of the LCD screen at the time I had a nice shot, sometimes I don't want to spend time taking the RAW file off to LR and process it etc, just to make it look like it did at the time. But I can't shoot RAW+ it's just too slow for what I do. So it's nice to know you can get what you would have seen at the time on the back of the camera from a RAW file one way or another.

I really hope to move to a Jpg only kinda shooter (at least 90% of the time, there will always be the need for RAW such as landscapes etc), because by going Jpg i will reap a heap of benefits.

I have another event tomorrow (paid) which I will chicken out of shooting Jpg in and will stick to RAW, but after tomorrow I think I will force myself to go Jpg for awhile and see just how much I am punished for making that decision...
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-25-2019, 02:59 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Yeah I use LR and the Camera Profiles (Portrait, Landscape, Bright etc) if I want to turn my RAW towards looking like it was in camera at the time (at least I think that's what that part in LR does).
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-25-2019, 01:51 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
FastStone will show the Jpg Preview that will have whatever your camera settings had at the time. For example, if I am shooting RAW but I have 'Portrait' as my Custom Image mode, then that is what FastStone will display in review, only once you take the RAW off to LR or whatever will you 'lose' that.

My experience with DCU is pretty bad, slow and buggy (I closed panels down with the 'x' and couldn't get them back :D).
You should try Fast Stone, I just culled in 20mins 1000 images down to 250, no importing and waiting, just SD card in the PC, click first image in Windows Explorer, opens FS super fast and off we go tagging the files we want to keep (or delete, up to you).
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-24-2019, 05:53 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Congrats! You Passed! This was actually all a test to see how much idiocy you could put up with from Bruce, and you passed with flying colours! :D :lol:

No seriously, thanks for all of this, you help clear the confusion cloud in my head and bring order to what I was experiencing. I appreciate the time it takes to reply in depth like you have and it has not gone unnoticed from this forum member.

Thanks again.

Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-23-2019, 09:40 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Interesting. Are you sure about this? Perhaps you missed this but I did post some results a few posts back where I shot in RAW+ and used the ICRD to pull out a L *** Jpg and it was EXACTLY the same size (to the KB) of the *** L Jpg taken at the time of the RAW+ shot...

I tested this numerous times on the KP and K-1, always what the ICRD can pull from the RAW file is the same size Jpg as what the camera can do when in RAW+ mode. Now I didn't go pixel peeping and compare the two, I just took it at face value that both Jpgs were of the same quality as one another (because of the same size file), therefore I could not understand the point of RAW+. Of course if the Jpg that is made at the time of the RAW+ shot taken is somehow superior to the Jpg than can be pulled from the RAW from ICRD is better then that's fair do's (but my findings thus far in terms of size suggested they are the same). Perhaps I need to pixel peep this.

I think I thought that your aforementioned comparison was either comparing Jpg from in camera vs what FS can manage from a RAW etc, or just that it's with older models of Pentax where things might be being a bit different. I wasn't aware these were KP RAW+ Jpg vs Jpg pulled from the RAW... I'll have to go back and reread that, my apologies.

Yeah I get that. I think there was a digital camera, maybe a Leica that decided to do away with a review/playback/lcd screen entirely, akin to the film day experience. Sounds bad, probably is bad, however if the RAW files are small because they just omit jpg previews or full sized jpgs embedded then that at least is perhaps some kind of tradeoff if these things are passed onto the user experience. It's probably a silly idea, however I can see if you shoot as a hobbyist and enjoy the entire photography experience (including the excitement or anticipation of having to wait till you get to a computer to see what your images actually look like... then you know.. it's something different at least :lol: :D :confused:

I think the only time I have seeing thus far the actual Jpg preview of the RAW file is on FS. I think the back of the pentax camera is displaying the full sized Jpg for you to review. I see no loss of quality when pixel peeping the RAW file vs Jpg when reviewing images, however when I do fire that same RAW file up into FastStone and inspect to 100% things do not look as clean as they are when I fire that same RAW file into Lightroom and inspect there, or/and... do a RAW export in LR with no PP to get a Jpg and then compare that vs the RAW Jpg preview in FS... (if that makes sense).

So.. I get that we need some kind of embedded Jpg in RAW files, my gripe or concern is we're getting the maximum along with it whether we like it or not (arguably overkill) and thus negates the use of the RAW+ feature as well as hampering what could be a better RAW only shooting experience (smaller RAW files perhaps, better buffer management etc). But I clearly need to pixel peep both a jpg generated from RAW+ as well as a Jpg pulled from the RAW+ file and assess that they are indeed identical, if not they I'm eating my words and there is still a reason to use RAW+ (for a higher quality Jpg). However, the fact they are the same size is odd no? Or rather it still exists that the RAW+ is carrying 'too high a quality a Jpg' for the purposes of simply 'reviewing'. I don't know about you but I simply use the screen on the back of the camera or FS to review such things as focus, composition, exposure and such (much of which the Exif can do for us anyway), if I look at FS and think the picture is not so good I still sometimes visit that image in LR just to be sure (and sometimes my mind is changed), so point being a Jpg preview will never be enough... not really, sometimes you just have to use a real screen and RAW development program to see really what you have and whether its worth spending time on or not.

Same really, minus the edits. FS is truly fantastic and quickly seeing what you have, it has a tagging feature and you can then move those tagged files to somewhere else (such as a folder for LR imports). I've had many arguments with people on Adobe forums about this work flow, they insist in using LR for the culling procedure but really its a waste of time. I just took 1000 shots at a wedding, FS allowed me to cull that down to 240 (first wave of culling, I will do one more), I'll likely end up at around 150ish, and it's at this point I will then import them all to LR. Importing 1000 images into LR is beyond ZZzz.... 150 is bad enough! And as a program on my system things are still sluggish to navigate and move around a library (PS is far quicker as an editor tool on my system).

Is it though? It really looks to me like I'm at times inspecting not the full sized Jpg but a lesser one? Or do you think it is the full one (same one that you would get from using ICRD to get the *** L Jpg?). I just haven't pixel peeped that much. I noted before that FS gives you different options of seeing the RAW file (Settings>RAW>View RAW files in: "Embedded Preview Image (Fastest)" (even says 'Preview). Are we to take from this that the Preview Jpg is the same quality as the *** L Jpg that can be pulled from the RAW in ICRD? Because those files come out the same size as a RAW+ Jpg hehehe...

Why then does FS offer different ways to view RAW files (Half Size, Actual etc). I note that when changing those options and viewing the DNG file not only does it take longer (durr... lol), but it actually looks different, takes on different rendering properties (Actual for example I think IS the real embedded Jpg).


PS: Furthermore, when we use the 'Save As' feature in FS, if we load the DNG up using the Fastest method vs Actual (for RAW viewing)... do we think it makes a difference to the quality of the Jpg we get when Saved?.. Hmm... :confused:

This is what I've been trying to explain all along. Using FS to extract JPGs from RAW files is a shortcut that you can use when you don't need full quality JPGs.


It also has a pretty good spot reduction ability as well I think? Like it actually works pretty good!
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-23-2019, 02:19 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
I think we're getting somewhere :D

So let's talk about the full sized Jpg first.

- in my above examples, does that mean for every 40-50mb RAW file it's being 'larger than it needs be' by carrying the weight of the file size of that full sized Jpg? Most of the ICRD of the RAW files for getting the Jpg seems to sit around 12-19mb, so does that correlate that the 40-50mb RAW files are being 'weighted down' by an additional 12-19mb and they could instead be actually only 25-35mb file sizes if they had just thumbnail previews or say * Jpgs (ie something to help us see on the back of the screens properly to judge the image by, just not something that is full sized? Because if that was the case then I think they possibly didn't do us any favours going about things the way they did. I would prefer;
  • Smallest RAW sizes possible so that we can take more shots before hitting the buffer, and deriving a full size Jpg from extraction or whatever is not possible, you have to load the RAW file in some kind of Raw developing program for editing (and get your jpg that way).

  • If you want RAW and a full size Jpg then use RAW+, but as it is it feels awfully like we have no choice and even in RAW we are crippled with the weight of a full size jpg whether we like it or not.

Going off on a tangent here for a second but... In camera there seems to be a couple of ways to go about getting a Jpg from RAW. You can either choose Raw Development or use 'Digital Filter', both of which will allow the image to be saved as a Jpg. I noted both have their uses but differ slightly, and if you visit Raw Development for example you can only apply ONE Digital Filter affect. It's a tad annoying in a sense that Raw Development gives you some options, but then you would have to use them, save as Jpg and then load that Jpg in camera again and then use Digital Filter to then apply further processing, would be kinda neat to have it all under 'one roof'. My Raw Development also has a spare space (- -), can I somehow choose what tools are available in RAW Development to get around this?

FS truly is a great program, I think a lot of my confusion is I was treating ICRD and FS as being the same (and programs like RawTherapee/LR as something else, Raw development stuff, longer times to show an image etc). But really the ICRD is more like LR/RT and it's FS all on it's own out there, just a simple Image Viewer. The fact it can get a Jpg from a RAW is cool, but as you say it's doing this differently from say LR or even ICRD (and the quality will vary).

I tried a brief amount of 'Save As' with FS and still felt the conversion times (in a batch session) were actually quite lengthy, so I'm not sure I will actually ever really use FS for this purpose, and just leave it as my main first wave of culling.

This thread has been very informative, I have learned a lot and have some decisions to make in future. I learned that RAW+ is not viable or needed for me, and if I want a Jpg that would have been exactly the same as if I used RAW+ or Jpg only I can have it, just after the fact by simply using just RAW mode (with no buffer strain). ICRD is actually pretty decent and fast at getting that Jpg. What I can and have done is eject one of my sd cards from a session, put in my pc, use FS to view the images, get a notepad up and take note of the last 3 digits of the files I like and want Jpgs from, then in camera (with the remaining SD card) browse those files (multiple images) and select them for ICRD, this can be done quite quickly. Failing that if I have time just do an entire folder ICRD if locking up the camera for awhile is not an issue (such as driving back home from a job etc).
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-22-2019, 09:40 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
You may have come into the thread a little late, this isn't exactly the whole point but to bring you up to date the previous poster said;

"Another test you can do: Set your camera to shoot RAW. Take 3 shots of the same scene with the JPG quality setting at *, **, and ***. I bet there won't be much of a difference in the size of the resulting RAW files, which tells you that the quality of the JPG that is embedded in the RAW file is not under your control."

And so I did this test, the RAW+ (DNG file) file stays the same* regardless of the Jpg quality selected in camera before hand. Furthermore, when you selected for example RAW+ with XS and * you can still generate the *** L Jpg from the ICRD, whereas perhaps there was some thinking that this might not be possible, you selected beforehand that the RAW+ would be XS and * therefore the only kind of ICRD possible for a Jpg might be of that quality (just talking about in camera here, not taking a RAW file off to PS and then Exporting/Saving as a Jpg etc).

*Between my RAW+ DNG files they were 53,436KB (when using *** L Jpg) and 52,032KB (when using * XS), the difference between the two could have happened anyway for a repeat shot.

If you shot events like I do you would never ever entertain shooting RAW+, especially if dual writing to two SD cards, the buffer issues are constant strain and beyond manageable. You would have a far quicker experience to shoot RAW and then review on the back of the camera the images and select the ones you wish to make a Jpg for the client. You can either finish the session, set the camera to give you Jpgs for all the shots taken in RAW and just wait awhile, or go through the images on the LCD and then select the ones you want Jpgs from (multiple Image select) and in this regard that can work quite well and is pretty swift.
RAW+ is just absolutely not for event (Pentax) shooting, if you write one RAW to one card and one Jpg to another, then maybe, but you still run the risk of losing all the RAW files if that card dies etc. This tog wouldn't shoot a wedding like that... and besides I don't know what kind of events the client really want jpgs immediately with no editing (so it's kinda weak argument for the necessity of RAW+ in teh first place imo, most clients are happy to wait for their images), if they do need them (official sport stuff) then it's probably being shot by cameras that aren't Pentaxes which are meant for this kinda thing, or the tog is actually shooting Jpgs for the absolute highest buffering capabilities.

I'm pretty firm with my opinion, shooting RAW+ makes so little sense, especially when you can always get the Jpg that the In Camera would produce had you selected Jpg only or RAW, why crush the buffer needlessly? Try writing to two cards RAW+ and take a Pixelshifted shot, it's quite amusing :D

Anyway... the purpose of this thread was more to do with FS and it's own ability to load a RAW DNG file and derive a Jpg from it that took on the qualities similar as to how it was taken at the time in camera, and whether it was worse in quality, better, the same, faster to do that job etc than using ICRD.

EDIT: Just in case there was any doubt I did a RAW+ shot with Jpg set to *** L, and I then did a ICRD of the RAW DNG to Jpg, came out exactly the same size as the Jpg taken with RAW+;

RAW+/DNG File = 44656KB
RAW+/Jpg File = 20718KB
Jpg from ICRD from the RAW+ DNG file = 20718KB
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-22-2019, 05:06 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Good stuff guys, I really appreciate it. And I do apologise if my terminology is all screwy (Steve is very used to this by me however :lol:). I simply mean 'getting a jpg from a RAW' and have been using terms like extraction etc where it might not have been technically ideal choice of words.

I did mean to get around to do some proper testing on this subject, but you know life and stuff, got busy and I carried on with my usual 'shoot RAW' only habits.

Thus far I have done a 200% image inspection of a Jpg from which was made from using RAW+ and a Jpg generated from the In Camera Raw Development mode from a RAW (was a slightly different image however, take a second later). I cannot tell when pixel peeping these images any difference at all in terms of quality.

I guess I can just tripod up, and then shoot RAW+, and with the RAW DNG taken from this shot actually use In Camera Raw Development (I shall call this ICRD from now on) to get a jpg from that, then compare the two Jpgs, they should be the same?

Right now we're talking about whether FS can do a better or worse job from pulling out a Jpg from a RAW file right? That's a bit different I guess.

I tried PDCU a few times and gave up, it was slow, buggy, applied exposure changes when asked not to, crashed multiple times. In all honesty at this time I would rather shoot RAW and then use the ICRD to get a Jpg from it if need be rather than use any computer software as they all seem to perform worse than what ICRD can achieve. Which again brings me back to my point about whether there is any real benefit to using RAW+ when it appears to me (at least on 200% image inspection in LR of the two Jpgs side by side) that there is no difference (very much unlike your example here @arkav). You place the buffer under less strain shooting RAW vs RAW+ and if you want a nice Jpg from those RAWs at any time you can, just use the ICRD.

The stuff about FS using a Jpg preview when viewing RAWs makes sense, and explains at times why I think sometimes I did 'bad' on the shot, that it's not sharp or noisy etc. Once firing that RAW into LR I can relax, I was just seeing nasty Jpg Preview artefacts from FS. However that's a good thing, as you say FS makes for a quick view of a RAW file, something LR doesn't allow. I can do my first wave of culling far quicker this way and then send the shots that made the cut to LR for proper editing.
I note you can change some of that stuff in FS, under Settings>RAW >View RAW files in: Fastest>Faster>Slow etc.

In regards to taking a RAW file and change the Jpg settings for each RAW file shot, I would guess (haven't tried) that the RAW file won't change in file size one little bit. It will be exactly the same and allow for a Jpg to be pulled out of it L and *** if you like, even if you had your Jpg settings as * in camera.

A curious test would be to shoot RAW+ with Jpg camera settings as only * etc, and then see with the RAW file if you can in ICRD pull out a *** Jpg etc, hopefully the RAW jpg will be higher quality than the + Jpg made...

Well I just did this test and confirm what I thought was true.

RAW = 42mb
Jpg+ = 322kb (XS *)
Jpg from the 42mb RAW ICRD = 12mb

This makes you wonder, if every RAW file ever shot is capable of getting the maximum Jpg quality possible (at least in the case of the K-1, regardless of Jpg settings), then really why bother ever with RAW+. Furthermore, are we K-1 shooters being hampered with our burst and frame rates shooting RAW because of this? I feel like our RAW files could be smaller, allowing for more bursts or better buffer limits, faster writing etc, because it always has a 'theoretical' 12mb jpg with it (in case we want it)... :confused:

It's like RAW is RAW+ and RAW+ is like RAW++ (:lol: :D).

On the one had it's nice that we get good jpgs from every RAW file ever taken, even when we're not in RAW+ mode, however on the other hand it makes me feel they could perhaps have done better here?

Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-22-2019, 01:25 AM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Yeah I think a lot of Sport shooters just shoot Jpg and don't even bother with the RAW, my argument is not with Jpgs, it's with the point of RAW+ (at least with the recent Pentax releases), it just seems a little meaningless.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-22-2019, 12:23 AM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
I agree with much of what you say, but I think this may all be camera specific where we're getting some cross wires. Let me explain;

I just pointed my camera at a dull scene (image not really worth posting) and made it do a RAW+ with my K-1, it gave these files;

RAW 40mb
Jpg 12mb

The Jpg settings were srgb *** Large.

I then took another shot at the same scene, this time toggling off Raw+ and just doing RAW, I then used the in camera development and extracted a jpg from that RAW file and it too was 12mb (with the in camera development on the K-1 it actually lets you choose the *** quality of Jpg to extract from the RAW as well as L or sRGB etc).
The extracted jpg was also 12mb.

So you can shoot RAW+ with the K-1 and get;

40mb RAW
12mb Jpg

or... shoot just RAW (40mb) and then (even a batch process) extract the jpgs which by all accounts seem to be exactly the same in terms of menu choices and file size to what a RAW+ would give. So there seems to be no advantage to shooting RAW+ with a K-1 unless you somehow need a Jpg quickly. Writing RAW+ to two sd cards at the same time (as the K-1 is dual slot) is not a fun experience at all, pixelshifted shots the funniest wait times ever :lol::confused::(

So whilst you might be correct, it seems at least with the K-1 (and I bet the KP as well as it's their latest camera) it seems RAW+ is pretty redundant really, a bit pointless like I say. I just can't imagine many times a shooter needs a Jpg right there and then, and if he can wait for a second for a Raw Development in camera he can have it... I'm not sure what shooting session requires a handover of Jpgs immediately.

I started this thread as I was curious if we could do what the camera does in it's raw development but externally and quicker via software (such as FS). The only gripe is the in camera extraction of Jpgs from RAW can be quite a long time, and when I started looking into things deeper I was very confused over what actually might be going on. I too suspected RAWs had naffish Jpgs... but now I'm really not so sure... Maybe the K-1's RAW files are larger than they need be because they are actually keeping full Jpgs 'just in case' :/

I no longer have PDCU installed, but if you look back through the forums I do write about my findings in greater detail, regarding the **** extraction and whether the file size is larger or smaller etc (I honestly cannot recall).
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-19-2019, 11:14 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
I think you're right, what is curious however is how PDCU (Pentax Digital Camera Utility) seems to very closely mimic the options of 'in camera' options, so I was curious how in specific this software works. So you can imagine my surprise when it offers a **** 'Premium' extract vs a *** which is offered in camera (and also as the maximum Jpg only shooting if that's what you want to do...).

Does it mean that you get higher quality Jpgs from shooting RAW and then using PDCU for a **** Jpg extracting process than actually turning off RAW and shooting Jpg only in camera at the maximum *** option given?!

Yeah... :confused:
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-19-2019, 09:31 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
I love chime ins, and I love your response, so thanks.

If I may I might point you to the post I made at the top of this page; FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's - Page 3 -

What I thought interesting was fact that PDCU offers **** Premium setting, whereas in camera development cuts out at ***. Does that mean the camera's *** = **** for PDCU? Does it mean anything? Does it mean the camera itself is not actually recording Jpgs as good as what they could be? Does that mean we can get a better Jpg from a RAW and selecting ****?!?


But I understand what you are saying that if when taking a RAW file it keeps a Jpg for later extracting and that Jpg has 'a limit', what I don't understand then is when playing around with ***/**** quantities or other extraction settings the file size does change.

Example. You have a RAW 40mb file, you use the in camera menu and use all the High Quality settings (*** etc). It gives you say a 15mb Jpg. We can imagine then this is the BEST Jpg inside the RAW. How then can we take that RAW file to various other programs (including PDCU) and generate a Jpg that is larger than this? If there is no higher quality possible, what explains the size difference? If say you pushed a slider up to 100% or whatever, thinking it would be higher quality, wouldn't the extraction just dump a file exactly the same as what the in camera extract can manage?

Either way, RAW+ is not nice, especially when writing to two sd cards, that is buffer hell for us pro event shooters. I enjoy the fact that I can shoot RAW (writing to two cards) and somehow get a decent Jpg from the RAW files at a later time if I really want it.

Right now my curve is whether shooting Jpg vs RAW (and extracting Jpg) actually has a significant difference in quality. The editing restrictions of Jpg vs Raw I think I can live with, I'm just talking about general stuff here like noise and sharpness. I do note for example when I use FS for my cull, I do use Jpgs of course for swiftness (this is just my first stage of culling), I get a good idea of whether the image is worth working on but often I can feel like the image is not good, missed focus, sharpness or noise bad, but fire that baby up in LR (using the aforementioned Edit in External Program) and everything changes, things are now fine (albeit flat and boring ha!). It could be my rendering settings for FS for the RAW Jpg previews are just set to being pretty bad.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 03-26-2019, 12:35 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Thanks rogerstg, I never thought about DNG>Tiff in camera, I'll do some testing and report back.

The only time I have taken a DNG file and produced a Tiff file from it in the early stages of editing has been when taking Pixelshifted images to RawTherapee for motion correction, the outcome is a Tiff file. I have noticed that this process we lose the Lens Profile Correction once we take that Motion Corrected Tiff file to LR, now I'm curious if the in camera RAW>Tiff loses any EXIF etc.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 03-25-2019, 01:11 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Yeh I wrote about that in my long winded explanation that I lost. Basically 3 ways to get a Jpg;
  1. 'Extract Jpg' (pulls a ** image only instead of ***, file size is only 5mb vs 18mb like it should be from Raw Development in camera)

  2. Save As with Image Processing. Creates the largest file, can select **** (Premium, possibly even higher quality than the *** from Raw Development), however the file alters in exposure or some other way from the Jpg Preview, some kind of automatic attempt at correcting exposure (I took my shot at -0.7EV Compensation) and even without (and with) visiting Labarotory cannot stop it from applying this 'fix')

  3. Save As, can again adjust quality to **** even, but the maximum file size I got was about 8mb, 10mb shy of what In Camera or RAW+ generates.

Basically I felt it wasn't doing anything better than what FSIV was doing. It also felt slow, buggy and clunky to operate, crashed once etc.

I was just curious to see if a third party program could spit out a Jpg from a DNG to being exactly the same size, or like extremely close to it is all. I think I just need to have a play with IQ settings in FSIV, it could be that even the in camera Jpg Raw Development is overkill, and as many have pointed out having the Quality slider at 90/100 in FSIV generates a significantly smaller size and going to 100/100 doubles the file size with little to no perceived increase in IQ.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 03-23-2019, 05:48 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
I just wrote a long write up to DCU5 but lost it all due to the infamous 'token expire' thing. Nice.

In short DCU5 is trash and can't do it (it being to spit out or extract a jpg from raw DNG that is of the same size as what the in camera/raw development manages). Despite being a close resemblance to all the options of the Pentax cameras I had hopes it could but it cannot. The program crashes is buggy and the one task where me might like it (over the other editing software tools) i.e. to extract the Jpg from RAW files is not great.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 03-22-2019, 03:55 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Yeah I dug out my KP box, found the DCU disk and installed and updated the software. I'm gonna take some shots today and do some testing, see if I can extract a Jpg with in camera settings from the DNG and for kicks compare to what kinda file size and vibe the RAW+ one spat out at the time as well. Will keep you posted.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 03-21-2019, 02:29 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
So you would be thinking DCU for this task rather than FSIV then? I kinda wanna minimise the amount of software I place on my PC is all. If I can make do with LR/PS and/or FSIV for this task rather than installing another program I'd probably prefer that.

I mean I exaggerate slightly with saying it takes me 2-3mins to get the RAW to resemble something like the Jpg Preview, sometimes it's just two clicks :D

My main editing platform currently is LR using RNI (Really Nice Images), they have a strong toolkit and present panel and I have noted they have a 'Jpg Compensation' aspect to the presets as well. I prefer to stay within LR for the Syncing component across a set of images. All of this really comes down to the photography style and type of tog you are. I fully understand why a lot of Landscape shooters would never entertain leaving RAW, nor a studio shooter where they want strong WB control. Then there are event togs (me) that also need high fps, great buffer headroom to capture candid moments and the uber accuracy of picture quality and range is not as important as capturing the best shot in the spur of the moment. So it's really more about that. As it is I have one User Mode set to Jpg only for that kinda affair, it's only recently come to my attention that shooting RAW (for all other situations) I can actually derive a Jpg from it, from how the camera took the shot at the time. The Prime engine is quite powerful, I think I could have some fun creating some unique tones and looks to some shots in camera, create a 'SOOC' album/platform (but all the while still having that RAW file safety net).
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 03-21-2019, 01:42 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
Yeh it seems you have slightly missed the point to this thread (my bad), I shall clarify.

Yes we can edit RAW, yes we can shoot Jpg, we can shoot Jpg and RAW but they all come at a price, namely at the time of the shot taken we are compromising in some way or another. If we shoot only Jpg we lose the ability to use a RAW file if we need that extra editing headroom. However shooting only Jpg and we get the best buffer headroom and burst speeds. If we shoot RAW+ and write a DNG and Jpg to a single card at a time we got the best of both worlds, however... things slow down on the shoot, made worse by writing to only one card, if we used RAW+ and write to both cards things get even worse. If we shoot RAW to SD1 and Jpg to SD2 that's not a bad option, but then in this mode we cannot use the 'One Push File Format' option and toggle out of that mode easily and into say 'Jpg only' (for those moments when you need speed and buffer headroom).*
If we shoot RAW and just RAW it seems we can essentially get the benefits of shooting as if we chose RAW+ but just derive the Jpg at a later time (after the fact and not during) and of course benefit from better buffer headrooms and what not than in RAW+ mode.

I'm intrigued as to how good Jpgs are for editing, but I am concerned to shoot and lose the safety net of RAW. I am intrigued as to what kind of SOOCs I can derive from the camera by having a play with the Custom Image settings, even creating some hybrid versions of my own.

Sometimes I feel with a RAW edit I have spent 2-3mins pushing the flat lifeless RAW to being something that closely resembles the Jpeg Preview that I first saw on the back of the camera screen :lol:. If you can manage to use Jpgs and use them well then you essentially get a far stronger camera experience, buffer headroom, better fps, better file transfers, quicker loading times, less cpu strain etc. It might be that during my exploration into this matter that in time I have some User Modes that are predominately set to Jpg (leaving the RAW safety net behind completely) and perhaps only using RAW when I know I will need it (dynamic landscape shots etc). I'm not at that point yet, I may never be, my education may prove to be that RAW is king, but it's a journey I am willing to undertake as wisely as possible.

Hope this helps understand the perspective and point to all this.

* I find it's best to leave the Memory Card Options as fixed and not change it, as it's a global setting and not bound to any User Mode or power down reset. If for example you want to toggle from shooting RAW SD1 RAW SD2 >> Jpg SD1 (and nothing to SD2) then it's quite a bit of button pressing (even with using Info shortcuts etc), and the changes are not reverted from changing mode dials or power downs (ie it can get a bit messy if absent minded like me :D)
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 03-21-2019, 01:01 PM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
I'm pretty sure Faststone isn't showing 720x480, it even shows bottom left the file name and size dimensions etc, they appear to be full res. And viewing on a 43 inch 4k monitor and 100% zooming in etc, looks fine (I take it 720x480 would be bloody obvious when blown up large on a monitor like what I have).

Is this Pentax Digital Camera Utility you speak of?; Digital Camera Utility 5 Update for Windows : Software Downloads | RICOH IMAGING
Is it free? I've never used it. Someone else on facebook suggested that this program uses the camera image settings as the default Raw converter. I mean is it worth installing that program, chucking a few DNG files at it and see what Jpgs it spits out?

Thus far I cannot get LR or PS to show me the Jpg Preview of my RAW DNG files, how are you managing it? For example, if I took a RAW shot and deliberately chose my Custom Image settings to be set as 'BW' (Monochrome), the image of course still appears as monochrome on the back of the camera, and then even once ejected from the SD card and put in the PC and using FSIV I see the image as being monochrome, but then as soon as I fire the DNG up in LR it turns it back into colour because it see's it as a RAW file etc. Under the Camera Calibration tool in LR I can select 'Bright', 'Landscape' etc, even 'Embedded' but it's still showing me the image in colour, I can't seem to figure out how to tell LR to show me the Jpg Preview version :confused:

And yeh, I'm not overly fussed about the file size, part of my intention in making this post was to draw attention as to whether certain settings were valid or even necessary (from an editing and output perspective). Just adjusting the slider to 100 Quality in FSIV changed the output file from being around 5mb to 14mb, which is quite a change and pretty close to what the (in camera) Raw Development program was giving. It's just when I take that Jpg and get editing on it I'd like to feel as though I am handling the best Jpg I can get that's not missing information etc.

I like to try and use my camera to it's fullest. I currently use all the User Mode dials, set to different tasks (Portrait, Action, Landscape etc). For a long time now I have been shooting RAW and never Jpg, but sometimes I feel the shot I took at the time (Jpg Preview) is almost good enough (or a great starting point), and that when I go to edit the RAW in LR I am wasting 2-3mins pushing that RAW file to being a little bit like the back of the Jpg Preview. Furthermore I would like to try playing around with some of the Custom Image presets and/or create my own. But at the same time I don't want to abandon RAW (in case I need it and mess up with shooting Jpgs strictly). Currently I am anaylising if RAW+ is really needed, if choosing the write to both memory cards at once, then RAW+ gets a bit ridiculous. I wouldn't mind changing my Memory Card Options but that's a global setting not sticking with User Modes and what not, and I have gotten into a mess in the past by not changing it back when toggling it etc.
So it strikes me that the RAW+ really only offers the benefit if you need that Jpg quickly. I don't, so if I continue to shoot RAW it appears I can have the Jpg any time I want from it, either from doing the RAW Development within the camera itself (ZZzzz....) or use a 3rd party program (preferred, run a batch, make a coffee, come back all done).

My computer also kinda sucks, I know that loading times with my Jpgs are quicker than DNG's. And if I do things like Brenizer shots then the software that handles stitching will prefer my lower file sized Jpgs to stitch vs a ton of DNG files.

Thanks for the detailed info on the settings within FSIV. I was thinking someone was gonna say "Find out what works for you" etc :lol: :D

Tbh Even the 90 Quality 5mb shot looked pretty decent to me, I just worry that when taking that file to LR for further editing, because it's only 5mb and not 20mb like what the RAW Developement convert would achieve in camera that I am therefore missing valuable editing parameters (colour spectrum restricted etc) or stuff like that. :confused:
If FSIV (or some other program) can output a Jpg that is the roughtly the same as what the RAW Development (in camera) does then I feel going in that I am working with the maximum potential of the Jpg file, and coming from a 'editing RAW only' perspective would be a good comparison to see in what areas I really struggle with the Jpg file.

Up until now I have used FSIV only as a first stage of image culling. Fire the DNG's up, look at the Jpg Previews as it gives them, see what shots look like they're worth editing, tag them, move them to a new location, import those tagged files to LR for proper editing. That's all I use the program for, literally just viewing and tagging.

I don't have DxO, C1 or PDCU installed but I do use LR, how are you managing to import a DNG in LR but then toggle it to take on the camera image settings taken at the time. Thus far I can set my Custom Image in camera to being 'BW' (monochrome) for example. The camera on review displays the DNG as being monochrome, FSIV will render the DNG file as being monochrome (i.e. using the Jpg full res preview), but once imported to LR the image is rendered properly as the RAW (so therefore in color) and toggling every option under Camera Calibration (where the Pentax profiles are) does not seem to put it 'back' to being the way it was taken at the time (ie in this case monochrome).

So do we have some recommended settings for the Batch Convert in FSIV? Currently getting file sizes too large and it looks like it's taking too long to do even 10-15 files. What 'sweet spot' settings wise would you good folks use?
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 03-21-2019, 02:17 AM  
FastStone Image Viewer and extracting Jpg's from RAW DNG's
Posted By BruceBanner
Replies: 66
Views: 3,455
So lately I have been entertaining the idea of using RAW+ as a mode for my cameras. There are however drawbacks to using that mode that I won't get into now, but it appears to me that it's possible if just simply shooting RAW for you to always derive the Jpg from the shot (complete with the Jpg settings used at the time of the shot from a couple of ways), either;

a) Use the camera itself and upon Playback>Downward Arrow Press>Raw Development


b) Use third party software, such as FastStone Image Viewer (FSIV) to somehow extract a decent copy of the Jpg preview file from the RAW DNG.

Here's what I have discovered thus far, but would appreciate some additional guidance from those with more know-how.

So Far

Ok, so to test things I took a picture in RAW+ mode, and generated an image with a DNG of 48.7mb and Jpg counterpart of 19.4mb (L, *** sRGB etc). I was using this as a kind of reference.

When viewing the DNG file in FSIV it actually shows the Jpg Preview, you can tell this easily with a test such as setting the camera settings Custom Image to being monochrome (BW), that's what you will see on FSIV, not the actual colour RAW file like how LR would present.

Now if I simply go 'Save As' in FSIV it will generate only a smallish file sized Jpg. From my 48.7mb DNG file it spat out a 5.77mb Jpg file (not quite the 19.4mb Jpg version the camera managed in RAW+ mode).

But what's this? There seems to be some additional Save Settings we can mess around with for the Jpg 'Save As' with the FSIV program, problem is I don't know what half this stuff means (see screen shot below).

Can You Help?

Look at the screen shot below and the variables we can change, and let's run through them all as they all impact the File Size of what the Jpg will end up as (actually trumping the 19.4mb the camera manages to generate for the Jpg in RAW+ mode!).

Ok let's first look at 'Quality', no brainer, we can slide that sucker up from 90 to 100. The new file size is now 14.4mb just from that tweak alone. Is it worth it? That's something else to consider... but we shall move on and look at the other settings.

Under Advanced we see 4 options, lets start with 'Photometric', it seems to be on 'YCbCr', perhaps this is default? Should I click the pull down menu I see the following options;


Changing to each of these gives the following new file size (provided we have still kept the Quality slider at 100).

RGB = 37mb
Grayscale = 10mb (image turned monochrome, durr)
YCbCr = 14.5mb
CMYK = 56mb! (um wat? this Jpg is now more mb than the RAW? lolwot)
YCbCrK = 38.5mb

Ok, cool... what does all this mean? I have my camera color space set to being sRGB, is that relevant to this area?

Ok we shall leave it as default YCbCr for now. Next up we have that little 'Progressive' box to tick, so tick it I shall. It has now reduced the file size from 14.5mb down to 13.4mb, ok I'm going to untick that :lol:

Across from that we have 'Optimize Huffman", it seems to be ticked as default, I'm going to untick that and see what it does to the file size. Ok, that pushed the file up to 17.6mb. So I'm guessing 'Progressive' and 'Optimize Huffman' are both some kind of compression? I think I shall leave them off for now.

Lastly we have 'Color Subsampling', it's default is set at 'High (Smaller File Size)' so lets change that, what options do we have?

'Disabled (Better Quality)' = 24.4mb image (if using this mode).
'Medium' = 18.7mb image (if using this mode).
'High (Smaller File Size) = which gives us our aforementioned 17.6mb file.

So... that seems to be about it, but we can take DNG file and extract a hefty Jpg via FSIV, and we can do batch files Saves/Converts as well.

Would anyone like to weigh in with their thoughts on all this and the options and what we should perhaps set things at?


It might be that I decide to shoot RAW only and leave RAW+ alone, so that I don't hit possible buffer/write issues when on a job. Once the job is done I could always do a batch conversion of my RAW files and 'extract' those Preview Jpgs that the DNG's seem to have and get a size close to what the camera would generate. Then work on the Jpgs from editing perspective with RAW files still there if I need them. It's simply a case of how quickly I want those Jpgs, as I take the shot or at a later time at the computer and after I run a batch conversion.


Search took 0.00 seconds | Showing results 1 to 21 of 21

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:18 AM. | See also:, 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?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]