Re: Camera JPEG engines

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by tony cooper, Nov 19, 2012.

  1. tony cooper

    tony cooper Guest

    On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 00:33:44 +0100, Alfred Molon
    <> wrote:

    >I'd be curious about your opinion/experience with the JPEG output of
    >today's cameras. Do you only shoot RAW and postprocess everything, or
    >RAW+JPEG and only postprocess selectively, or do you only shoot JPEG?
    >
    >My personal experience is that the JPEG output of modern cameras is not
    >bad, sometimes surprisingly good, and -if the camera is set up properly-
    >only a certain percentage of images need RAW processing.


    It depends.

    If I'm shooting family pix outdoors in good light, I'll shoot RAW plus
    ..jpg. Usually, when I skim through the results, the .jpg versions are
    just fine. I'll only use the RAW when there's some reason to. It's
    quicker to process the .jpgs.

    The rest of the time I'll shoot RAW only.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Nov 19, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. tony cooper

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/19/2012 2:03 AM, Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <>, tony cooper
    > says...
    >> The rest of the time I'll shoot RAW only.

    >
    > Is the JPEG output of your camera so bad?
    >

    I shoot primarily in RAW because is considerably more information in a
    RAW file. I can do all sorts of non-destructive editing on a RAW file,
    and coax a larger verity of information from that file, than even the
    best JPEG.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 21, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. tony cooper

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/21/2012 1:07 PM, Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <50ac4a4f$0$10753$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > says...
    >> I shoot primarily in RAW because is considerably more information in a
    >> RAW file. I can do all sorts of non-destructive editing on a RAW file,
    >> and coax a larger verity of information from that file, than even the
    >> best JPEG.

    >
    > But sometimes cameras have a very good JPEG output. You could shoot
    > RAW+JPEG and save time when the camera JPEG is good.
    >


    Doesn't make any significant difference in time, unless I would want the
    image straight out of the camera, which rarely happens.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 21, 2012
    #3
  4. Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > In article <50ac4a4f$0$10753$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > says...


    >> I shoot primarily in RAW because is considerably more information in a
    >> RAW file. I can do all sorts of non-destructive editing on a RAW file,
    >> and coax a larger verity of information from that file, than even the
    >> best JPEG.


    > But sometimes cameras have a very good JPEG output. You could shoot
    > RAW+JPEG and save time when the camera JPEG is good.


    True, but note that in some cameras you can only get the highest
    quality jpeg if you aren't producing RAW at the same time.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
    Chris Malcolm, Nov 21, 2012
    #4
  5. Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > In article <>, Chris Malcolm says...
    >> True, but note that in some cameras you can only get the highest
    >> quality jpeg if you aren't producing RAW at the same time.


    > Why would that be a problem, given that memory is cheap?


    It would be problem because you couldn't select to have both RAW and
    the highest quality JPEG at the same time, i.e. you couldn't postpone
    the decision as to which to use to post-processing time, unless you
    took two separate photographs at the time of shooting.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
    Chris Malcolm, Nov 23, 2012
    #5
  6. Floyd L. Davidson <> wrote:
    > Chris Malcolm <> wrote:
    >>Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    >>> In article <50ac4a4f$0$10753$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    >>> says...

    >>
    >>>> I shoot primarily in RAW because is considerably more information in a
    >>>> RAW file. I can do all sorts of non-destructive editing on a RAW file,
    >>>> and coax a larger verity of information from that file, than even the
    >>>> best JPEG.

    >>
    >>> But sometimes cameras have a very good JPEG output. You could shoot
    >>> RAW+JPEG and save time when the camera JPEG is good.

    >>
    >>True, but note that in some cameras you can only get the highest
    >>quality jpeg if you aren't producing RAW at the same time.


    > Is that real? What camera would be an example of that?


    Sony A77 is one.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
    Chris Malcolm, Nov 23, 2012
    #6
  7. Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > In article <>, Chris Malcolm says...
    >> Floyd L. Davidson <> wrote:
    >> > Chris Malcolm <> wrote:
    >> >>Alfred Molon <> wrote:


    >> >>> But sometimes cameras have a very good JPEG output. You could shoot
    >> >>> RAW+JPEG and save time when the camera JPEG is good.
    >> >>
    >> >>True, but note that in some cameras you can only get the highest
    >> >>quality jpeg if you aren't producing RAW at the same time.

    >>
    >> > Is that real? What camera would be an example of that?

    >>
    >> Sony A77 is one.


    > Are you sure about that? The Sony A65, the smaller brother of the A77,
    > produces the highest quality JPEG in RAW+JPEG mode.


    The A77 has an extra higher quality jpeg mode lacking in the A65. I
    assumed that wasn't what you got along with the RAW-JPEG option
    because that was the simplest insterpretation of the not quite
    specific manual and gave the simplest software equivalence between the
    two cameras. But I could be wrong. I'll have to think of a good
    simple practical test to find out which kind of JPEG accompanies RAW
    in the A77.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
    Chris Malcolm, Nov 29, 2012
    #7
  8. Chris Malcolm <> wrote:
    > Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    >> In article <>, Chris Malcolm says...
    >>> Floyd L. Davidson <> wrote:
    >>> > Chris Malcolm <> wrote:
    >>> >>Alfred Molon <> wrote:


    >>> >>> But sometimes cameras have a very good JPEG output. You could shoot
    >>> >>> RAW+JPEG and save time when the camera JPEG is good.
    >>> >>
    >>> >>True, but note that in some cameras you can only get the highest
    >>> >>quality jpeg if you aren't producing RAW at the same time.
    >>>
    >>> > Is that real? What camera would be an example of that?
    >>>
    >>> Sony A77 is one.


    >> Are you sure about that? The Sony A65, the smaller brother of the A77,
    >> produces the highest quality JPEG in RAW+JPEG mode.


    > The A77 has an extra higher quality jpeg mode lacking in the A65. I
    > assumed that wasn't what you got along with the RAW-JPEG option
    > because that was the simplest insterpretation of the not quite
    > specific manual and gave the simplest software equivalence between the
    > two cameras. But I could be wrong. I'll have to think of a good
    > simple practical test to find out which kind of JPEG accompanies RAW
    > in the A77.


    I did the same shot with extra-fine jpeg quality and RAW plus jpeg at
    ISO 100 (i.e. very little noise to become confused with detail by the
    jpeg compressor). The extra fine jpeg file was about 50% larger than
    the jpeg from the RAW plus jpeg. I conclude that extra-fine is as I
    suspected an extra level of jpeg quality that you don't get with the
    RAW plus jpeg option.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
    Chris Malcolm, Dec 9, 2012
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jude Barnes
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    896
    David Harrison
    Aug 20, 2004
  2. ray

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    ray, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    208
    Gordon Freeman
    Nov 19, 2012
  3. David Taylor

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    David Taylor, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    207
    David Taylor
    Nov 19, 2012
  4. Martin Brown

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    Martin Brown, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    228
    Chris Malcolm
    Nov 29, 2012
  5. nick c

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    nick c, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    188
    nick c
    Nov 19, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page