Re: Camera JPEG engines

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Martin Brown, Nov 19, 2012.

  1. Martin Brown

    Martin Brown Guest

    On 18/11/2012 23:33, 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?


    There is not enough time in the day to shoot everything in RAW and post
    process. Highest quality JPEG is generally very good on most decent
    cameras and has been for ages. Some are actually faithfully digitising
    the thermal noise as well as the image - wasting space on the card.

    The days when JPEGs quality names were inflated so that "Good" = "Bad",
    "Very Good" = "Good" and "Excellent" = "Very Good" are long gone!
    >
    > 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.
    >

    Mostly those including insane dynamic range where shadow detail and
    highlights are both simultaneously important. Weddings being an obvious
    situation where you will need to use post processing or risk disaster.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown
    Martin Brown, Nov 19, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> writes:

    > On 18/11/2012 23:33, 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?

    >
    > There is not enough time in the day to shoot everything in RAW and
    > post process. Highest quality JPEG is generally very good on most
    > decent cameras and has been for ages. Some are actually faithfully
    > digitising the thermal noise as well as the image - wasting space on
    > the card.


    Ah; now THAT is why I converted to Bibble Pro, these many years ago.
    Makes processing 1500 raw files much more palatable -- I can adjust
    groups rather than individual files, and get the equivalent of pro-lab
    video-analyzed prints in similar amounts of operator time, or less.

    --
    Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
    Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
    Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
    Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
    David Dyer-Bennet, Nov 19, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. David Dyer-Bennet <> wrote:
    > Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> writes:
    >> On 18/11/2012 23:33, 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?

    >>
    >> There is not enough time in the day to shoot everything in RAW and
    >> post process. Highest quality JPEG is generally very good on most
    >> decent cameras and has been for ages. Some are actually faithfully
    >> digitising the thermal noise as well as the image - wasting space on
    >> the card.


    > Ah; now THAT is why I converted to Bibble Pro, these many years ago.
    > Makes processing 1500 raw files much more palatable -- I can adjust
    > groups rather than individual files, and get the equivalent of pro-lab
    > video-analyzed prints in similar amounts of operator time, or less.


    Did you convert to Aftershot Pro when Corel bought Bibble?

    --
    Chris Malcolm
    Chris Malcolm, Nov 29, 2012
    #3
    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:
    909
    David Harrison
    Aug 20, 2004
  2. ray

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    ray, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    215
    Gordon Freeman
    Nov 19, 2012
  3. tony cooper

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    tony cooper, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    308
    Chris Malcolm
    Dec 9, 2012
  4. David Taylor

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    David Taylor, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    213
    David Taylor
    Nov 19, 2012
  5. nick c

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    nick c, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    195
    nick c
    Nov 19, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page