File :-(, x, )
RAW vs. JPEG Anonymous
What's up /p/

Took a few shots this afternoon and decided to upload this to show the difference between straight from camera JPEG's(left) and edited RAW's(right).

Just in case Ken Rockwell brainwashed some of you guys to give up shooting RAW.

Camera is a Nikon D80 with the 18-200mm VR lens and a Hoya PL filter.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern762Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:04:21 22:52:07Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length18.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1200Image Height896RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>Just in case Ken Rockwell brainwashed some of you guys
>with the 18-200mm VR lens

my question is, couldn't you have gotten the jpeg to look exactly the same as the raw file with the same amount of PP time? adjust some curves, up the saturation a little, color balance towards yellow and red... ?
>> Anonymous
Did you add the vignetting in PS? All my RAWs from my CHDK'd A550 have vignettes on them that the camera's image processor removes on its way to jpeg.
>> Sicko !L3HRY/miC.
An unedited JPEG vs an edited RAW?

What the hell kind of comparison is that?
>> Anonymous
Well, really, which one is more realistic? Was the car grey or metallic blue? Without knowing the scene, the picture on the left looks a lot more realistic. And that's what a good photo from the camera should be: realistic. You can do unrealistic things to it in photoshop if you want.
>> Anonymous
>D80

Theres your problem. Ken Rockwell recommends only D40+18-200mm VR for any type of shooting.
>> Anonymous
>>166618
>An unedited JPEG vs an edited RAW?
>What the hell kind of comparison is that?

Agreed.
BOTH PIX UNEDITED OR GTFO.
>> Anonymous
OP here:

Yep I added the vignetting.

My point is that I did most of these changes using only 5 minutes in the PS RAW editor, fixing CA and choosing WB. Without loss of image quality.

You can't do that in 5 minutes with a JPEG.
>> Anonymous
>>166626
>OP here:
>my comparison doesn't mean shit
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>166626
1 minute with the jpeg

/thread

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern702Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution250 dpiVertical Resolution250 dpiImage Created2008:04:21 14:30:16Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length18.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Martin !!ve2Q1ETWmJH
You cant compare RAW vs JPEG
.. its swings and roundabouts.

Jpeg = Smaller file size, different quality compression
Raw = Large file size, yet ability to work more closely with the image factors.

Its all up to personal preferance.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>166632
Ok trolls and Ken Rockwell fans, than we compare the edited JPEG with the edited RAW.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern750Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution250 dpiVertical Resolution250 dpiImage Created2008:04:21 23:39:17Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length18.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height598RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OH HAI GUYZ! RAW SUCKS!
>> Martin !!ve2Q1ETWmJH
>>166645
hes just heavenly :3 </sarcasm>
>> Anonymous
Edited isn't a good comparison.
We need UNEDITED JPEG versus UNEDITED RAW.
>> I||ICIT !!mknjFN/v/49
>>166650
well then theres obviously going to be no difference as the camera will apply whatever picture style(for canon) you have chosen and so jpegs and raws will come out exactly the same.

if you shoot raw, and dont PP it your a tool, and your completely missing the point of shooting raw.
>> Anonymous
>>166659
>HURRRR SHOOT RAWZ COZ U KANT PP A JPEG IMAGE HURRRRRRR
>> I||ICIT !!mknjFN/v/49
>>166662
well as its clearly been shown before, you shoot raw to get the extra data at the far end of the hitogram and they allow much more altering before things start to get destroyed or become noticeable.

good luck with the hurrrr and your shitty jpegs.
>> I||ICIT !!mknjFN/v/49
>>166668
oh and the fact that i can adjust WB after the matter, apply noise reduction easier and decide if i want the shot in b/w or colour, considering if its shots in b/w its a lot harder to get back to colour.
>> Falldog !2qYdimqiHs
OP is fail
>> Anonymous
SPOILER THEY ARE BOTH JPEGS AS BROWSERS DO NOT PROCESS RAW FILES
>> Anonymous
>>166670
>oh and the fact that i can adjust WB after the matter, apply noise reduction easier and decide if i want the shot in b/w or colour

those all things you can do to a jpeg in any good image-editing software, you dumb ninny.
>> Even_Steven !!rUmVORA7JiP
>>166678

Except RAW does it better. There have been times where correcting white balance in jpegs results in posterization. The same can be said for adjusting levels.

RAW also allows for better noise reduction.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
I'm pretty sure I already won this argument once in the last week...
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
Why the fuck are we still debating jpg vs raw? If you're a total n00b or just lazy, shoot JPG. If you actually give a shit about the quality of your images, shoot raw. Why is this so hard to understand?