More cropping in JPeg than RAW ?

Crotal Bell

Crotal Bell

Messages
2,516
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
Yes
I usually have an SD card for RAW and one for JPeg as a back up. I edit the RAW and wipe them both before the net venture.

The other day I was using 2x digital zoom on the Pana G9 which only works on the JPeg quality option, so I ended up editing everything on that card.

I use Faststone image viewer editor which does fine for me. If I try to crop to hard in RAW, the result does not fill the full screen, it seems to have a limit, but I noticed that with JPeg, the editor lets me crop much closer and still stretches the crop to fullscreen, but the files are much larger in size and often won't post to the forum.

Does anyone know why it works this way?
 
Is it using the inbuilt jpeg ? The small file that always comes with the RAW. The jpeg from camera would be much larger and you could crop in more with it.
 
Raw files are not viewable, they are just data. So when you edit a RAW file it has to be converted to a format that can be displayed which is done by codec software installed on your computer. The jpegs from the camera have been converted from RAW to jpeg directly on the camera but on your computer the RAW has been converted by the codec so the conversion is done by different pieces of software which could be where the difference comes from.
 
johnty52 said:
Is it using the inbuilt jpeg ? The small file that always comes with the RAW. The jpeg from camera would be much larger and you could crop in more with it.
Click to expand...
Yes, in-built JPeg in camera. I guess this is why RAW take up less space on the cards ?
 
sirch said:
Raw files are not viewable, they are just data. So when you edit a RAW file it has to be converted to a format that can be displayed which is done by codec software installed on your computer. The jpegs from the camera have been converted from RAW to jpeg directly on the camera but on your computer the RAW has been converted by the codec so the conversion is done by different pieces of software which could be where the difference comes from.
Click to expand...
That makes sense, thank you.
 
johnty52 said:
Is it using the inbuilt jpeg ? The small file that always comes with the RAW. The jpeg from camera would be much larger and you could crop in more with it.
Click to expand...
Yes, it only opens the jpeg.

For the OP, this actually shows that Faststone is NOT fine for you :)
You have taken RAWs for nothing. (though you sill have them for later)

Download RawTherapee just to play with, and see what your RAWs actually look like.

And then if you want something easy to use and not expensive, invest in Affinity :)

Faststone is a good viewer and basic editor, and I fine it useful to find photos

Affinity may not be the best for Raw, but it is very good, look at their channel on youtube :)

It only costs about the same as two small meals for the family from the box tastes better than the burger people :)
 
Sangoma said:
Yes, it only opens the jpeg.

For the OP, this actually shows that Faststone is NOT fine for you :)
You have taken RAWs for nothing. (though you sill have them for later)

Download RawTherapee just to play with, and see what your RAWs actually look like.

And then if you want something easy to use and not expensive, invest in Affinity :)

Faststone is a good viewer and basic editor, and I fine it useful to find photos

Affinity may not be the best for Raw, but it is very good, look at their channel on youtube :)

It only costs about the same as two small meals for the family from the box tastes better than the burger people :)
Click to expand...
I'll take a look at RawTherapee but I won't be paying for any editors buddy, I wasted months of subs on Lightroom because I never used it. Wasn't that impressed.
I think editors are a bit of a mind game, my RAW edited images on Faststone are good enough to make me happy. I love my photography but I can't micro adjust images and spend a lot of time on them, I just like a simple tweak and then take them as they come.
 
Crotal Bell said:
I'll take a look at RawTherapee but I won't be paying for any editors buddy, I wasted months of subs on Lightroom because I never used it. Wasn't that impressed.
I think editors are a bit of a mind game, my RAW edited images on Faststone are good enough to make me happy. I love my photography but I can't micro adjust images and spend a lot of time on them, I just like a simple tweak and then take them as they come.
Click to expand...
You can download a free trial of Affinity.

I would not buy a subscription to software, which is the one reason I bought Affinity.

Prior to that I used Gimp, which does nearly everything for free, but I had to use separate programmes for HDR and stitching.

I think the point is that with Faststone you are not actually processing the RAWs, you are processing a low resolution JPEG that is stored with the RAW data for convenience.

If using Faststaone you open a RAW file from the camera in one window, and the max size JPEG from the camera of the same image, and then zoom in to the same small area on each, you will see the JPEG is much clearer and less pixelated than the "RAW", simply because Faststone has not opened the RAW data, but the embedded JPEG.

I don't know if there is a way to make Faststone open the RAW, but it seems clear from your description yours is not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top