JPG Raw & Processing

[AdamGP86]

As an experiment today I decided to shoot in Raw + JPG instead of just JPG.
When revewing my shots in Picasa I noticed a much larger difference than I expected.

All my shots nn raw looked much more detailed than the JPG shots but duller, for example In a portraight the clouds & building looks very detailed on the raw but the sky was almost blown in the JPG however the JPG seemed to look more vibrant and brighter.

I'm assuming this is because the camera has adjusted the image for me where as the raw being just raw data would be completely un adjusted.

What do people here use for processing these? as a whole I liked being able to get more detail straight out of the raw shots however I found most of the JPGs i was happy with out of the camera but I felt i wanted to tweak all the raw's since they seemed dull.

Does anyone reccoment and cheap/free s/w that handles processing raw files?
( I currently use picasa & ps elements6 )

 

[TCR4x4]

As an experiment today I decided to shoot in Raw + JPG instead of just JPG.
When revewing my shots in Picasa I noticed a much larger difference than I expected.

All my shots nn raw looked much more detailed than the JPG shots but duller, for example In a portraight the clouds & building looks very detailed on the raw but the sky was almost blown in the JPG however the JPG seemed to look more vibrant and brighter.

I'm assuming this is because the camera has adjusted the image for me where as the raw being just raw data would be completely un adjusted.

What do people here use for processing these? as a whole I liked being able to get more detail straight out of the raw shots however I found most of the JPGs i was happy with out of the camera but I felt i wanted to tweak all the raw's since they seemed dull.

Does anyone reccoment and cheap/free s/w that handles processing raw files?
( I currently use picasa & ps elements6 )

RAW is just that. Raw data with no processing so it should and will look dull and flat to start. A jpg will always look better out of the box as its been fully processed.

I use Lightroom, which is super easy to use. It's not cheap, but is much more than just a processed of files.

 

[woof woof]

What do people here use for processing these?

Does anyone reccoment and cheap/free s/w that handles processing raw files?
( I currently use picasa & ps elements6 )

Did you get Canon DPP with your camera? Personally I don't like it, in fact I think it's awful but many do like it and it's free. You could also take a look at Rawtherapee which is free and I've seen others get simply fantastic results from it. If you want to give it a try Google and you will find it.

Some free packags have relatively poor noise reduction tools but there are some free ones available. You could try Neat Image and Noiseware.

I use CS5.

 

[redhed17]

A jpg will always look better out of the box as its been fully processed.

Depends what the settings were set to in camera.


Rawtherapee is a free RAW processor that lacks the refined interface and features of the Adobe products, but is perfectly usable. :shrug:

Photoshop Elements has a cut down version of Adobe Camera Raw compared to the full Photoshop CS*'s ACR. But of course you get pixel editing potential of Elements too, which you do get with CS6 (of course) but don't get with LightRoom.

LR4 has the same RAW processing as the latest ACR, version 7.1, included with Photoshop CS6, which has changed

There are a few other options listed here.


I've found this interesting site here discussing Picasa and how it handles RAW processing.

 

[ShoeQueen]

I'm assuming this is because the camera has adjusted the image for me where as the raw being just raw data would be completely un adjusted.

Yep. I find it very hard to go back to editing jpeg after being used to editing raw. The jpeg has already had things done to it in camera - and the exact same applied to all the images. I want the control to edit an image how I want it to look.

I use Lightroom and find it very fast and easy to use.

 

[andyred]

I'm assuming this is because the camera has adjusted the image for me where as the raw being just raw data would be completely un adjusted........................

RAW is just that. Raw data with no processing so it should and will look dull and flat to start. A jpg will always look better out of the box as its been fully processed.....

Hi Adam

Yes as Tom says, the jpeg has had some processing applied in camera, which is why the 2 images look different.

It is worth checking yor settings as normally you can adjust the parameters for the procesing in camera as well...

 

[andyred]

Does anyone reccoment and cheap/free s/w that handles processing raw files?
( I currently use picasa & ps elements6 )

I use Lightroom, which is super easy to use. It's not cheap, but is much more than just a processed of files.

Did you get Canon DPP with your camera.

I've just picked up lightroom and am getting to grips with it presently, but it does seem relatively easy to use.

You should be able to pick up LR3 for around the £35-40 and I think LR4 is £100.


As Alan says, Canon's DPP is available and free with your body, if they release any updates, you get these for free as well - I've had mixed results with it and I must say, having just got LR, I do prefer LR over DPP, but it's certinaly worth a try and as it's free, it doesn't matter if you don't get along with it.

 

[AdamGP86]

Thanks for the replies, I had a play with DPP last night, Interestingly when I batch process the Raw files the JPGs produced are identical to the JPGs the camera makes so the only drawback I can see from moving to Raw is the loss of shooting FPS & the increase in memory.
I think I'm going to have to stop storing all my shots on my laptop ( I have a backup on ext hdd, but I think i'm going to need a 2nd one as a work drive )

I'll maybe grab a trial of lightroom, I have heard good things about it from others too

 

[TCR4x4]

Thanks for the replies, I had a play with DPP last night, Interestingly when I batch process the Raw files the JPGs produced are identical to the JPGs the camera makes so the only drawback I can see from moving to Raw is the loss of shooting FPS & the increase in memory.
I think I'm going to have to stop storing all my shots on my laptop ( I have a backup on ext hdd, but I think i'm going to need a 2nd one as a work drive )

I'll maybe grab a trial of lightroom, I have heard good things about it from others too

In DPP you can attach the jpg process to the RAW file. So you can get the RAW too look identical to what the camera would have given. Lightroom has presets, but not direct processing copies

 

[HoppyUK]

Thanks for the replies, I had a play with DPP last night, Interestingly when I batch process the Raw files the JPGs produced are identical to the JPGs the camera makes so the only drawback I can see from moving to Raw is the loss of shooting FPS & the increase in memory.
I think I'm going to have to stop storing all my shots on my laptop ( I have a backup on ext hdd, but I think i'm going to need a 2nd one as a work drive )

I'll maybe grab a trial of lightroom, I have heard good things about it from others too

Another advantage of DPP is the custom lens aberrations corrections it has, for CA, vignetting and distortion. And they work very well.

Lightroom is most people's favourite, and that also has similar custom lens corrections.

 

[Phil V]

Thanks for the replies, I had a play with DPP last night, Interestingly when I batch process the Raw files the JPGs produced are identical to the JPGs the camera makes so the only drawback I can see from moving to Raw is the loss of shooting FPS & the increase in memory.
I think I'm going to have to stop storing all my shots on my laptop ( I have a backup on ext hdd, but I think i'm going to need a 2nd one as a work drive )

I'll maybe grab a trial of lightroom, I have heard good things about it from others too

As DPP is Canon's software its able to use the picture style you set in camera, thats why with no effort it gives you exactly the same result the camera did.

However the power in RAW is what you do with it in your RAW processor - so you should ignore the picture style and experiment further with what DPP allows you to do. I love it for its powerful Raw processing, but it doesn't offer the complete workflow slution you get from Lightroom.

I'm a bit of a stick in the mud though - so all my Raw batching is done in DPP then I do more processing in Photoshop.