RAW and JPG files

Started 9 months ago | Discussions
brycesteiner
Senior MemberPosts: 1,354Gear list
Like?
RAW and JPG files
9 months ago

I did a food shoot not long ago and it went very well. This was my first test shots I was trying out at the restaurant. I have two files here. The picture of the nachos was very underexposed. I mainly am a JPG shooter, somtimes raw, but I thought this would be a good time to try out how good RAW really can pull detail out of severely underexposed images. I found out I'm not up to par on doing this.

This is the JPG +5.5 exposure compensation

RAW file +5.5 exposure and auto correct.

I got a lot more detail out of the jpg, especially out of the shadow areas, than I could out of the RAW file.

I guess I really don't know what I'm doing. RAW's are always supposed to have more information.

The original files are here if you want to give it a go and help me do better with RAW.

http://www.westbendnews.net/ABPhotography/galleries/rawtest/_BS34783.JPG

http://www.westbendnews.net/ABPhotography/galleries/rawtest/_BS34783.ORF

Thanks for your help.

-- hide signature --

Make it a Great day!

 brycesteiner's gear list:brycesteiner's gear list
Olympus E-510 Olympus E-30 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +5 more
DanielBme
Regular MemberPosts: 493
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

I took a quick play at it.  Here's what I was able to get after 5min.

-- hide signature --

'Not all those who wander are lost.'
- J.R.R Tolkein

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Tullis
Forum ProPosts: 27,563Gear list
Like?
Trash both those files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

These aren't simply underexposed. They're total failures of exposure. The shutter speed was way to high, ISO low, inappropriate for that objective. And the results from the developing attempt is just horrible.

Don't shoot for RAW until you come to understand how to make a decent exposure for JPGs that don't need extreme corrections post-exposure.   RAW isn't for fixing bad exposures and techniques, it's an aide for good techniques that call for post-exposure development.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm F0.95 Aspherical Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bluelemmy
Contributing MemberPosts: 824Gear list
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

The best thing to do with an exposure like this is to ditch it!

I haven't bothered with noise reduction here but the main thing it to get the white balance within a mile of correct, get rid of as much black clipping as possible and extend the tonal balance to the right. I've only spent a couple of minutes with it - it could be improved a bit with more time.

As I said, with an exposure as off as this (how did you manage that?) it can only be damage limitation.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JeanPierre Martel
Senior MemberPosts: 2,076Gear list
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

According to Olympus' algorithms, for a focal length of 45mm, in low light situations, the shutter speed should be something like 1/100 sec and the ISO boosted to a lot higher.

Is you OM-D e-m5 set to top the ISO at 100 ? If so, why ?

 JeanPierre Martel's gear list:JeanPierre Martel's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +22 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
s_grins
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,083Gear list
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

Having 1.8/45 lens it is difficult to underexpose so much.

I'd use ISO 600-1000 and S= 1/120.

And sorry I've no desire to work with RAW - subject is not yamy.

-- hide signature --

Camera in bag tends to stay in bag...

 s_grins's gear list:s_grins's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Tullis
Forum ProPosts: 27,563Gear list
Like?
I suspect. . .
In reply to Bob Tullis, 9 months ago

. . . you may have Live View Boost enabled, which will show you a brighter exposure in the EVF or LCD than the actual live view of the exposure to be taken, and that might be leading you astray.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm F0.95 Aspherical Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
photofan1986
Senior MemberPosts: 2,351Gear list
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

As the others suggested, you should trash such a bad exposed picture.

However, if you insist, here is the best I can do, for a small print it should look ok.

 photofan1986's gear list:photofan1986's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR Canon PowerShot S100 Olympus PEN E-PM2 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brycesteiner
Senior MemberPosts: 1,354Gear list
Like?
Re: Trash both those files
In reply to Bob Tullis, 9 months ago

Bob Tullis wrote:

These aren't simply underexposed. They're total failures of exposure. The shutter speed was way to high, ISO low, inappropriate for that objective. And the results from the developing attempt is just horrible.

Don't shoot for RAW until you come to understand how to make a decent exposure for JPGs that don't need extreme corrections post-exposure. RAW isn't for fixing bad exposures and techniques, it's an aide for good techniques that call for post-exposure development.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

Oh, I didn't keep them at all. It was just the first shot that after coming from a sports event. The other pictures are near perfect from the JPGs.

I was just seeing how people get results from RAW when the picture is a completely failure on exposure. Did you use the RAW or JPG?

-- hide signature --

Make it a Great day!

 brycesteiner's gear list:brycesteiner's gear list
Olympus E-510 Olympus E-30 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brycesteiner
Senior MemberPosts: 1,354Gear list
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to photofan1986, 9 months ago

photofan1986 wrote:

As the others suggested, you should trash such a bad exposed picture.

However, if you insist, here is the best I can do, for a small print it should look ok.

Oh, I didn't keep it at all. It was just the first shot that after coming from a sports event. The other pictures are near perfect from the JPGs.

I was just seeing how people get results from RAW when the picture is a completely failure on exposure, and this was a good example.

Did you use the RAW or JPG? How did you get the detail if it is RAW. I don't seem to be able to pull this out in Aperture.

-- hide signature --

Make it a Great day!

 brycesteiner's gear list:brycesteiner's gear list
Olympus E-510 Olympus E-30 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LaMesa
Senior MemberPosts: 2,284Gear list
Like?
Did you have the lens cap off?
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

Probably you are asking too much. This picture is nearly ruined.

Herbert

-- hide signature --
 LaMesa's gear list:LaMesa's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Tullis
Forum ProPosts: 27,563Gear list
Like?
Re: Trash both those files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

brycesteiner wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

These aren't simply underexposed. They're total failures of exposure. The shutter speed was way to high, ISO low, inappropriate for that objective. And the results from the developing attempt is just horrible.

Don't shoot for RAW until you come to understand how to make a decent exposure for JPGs that don't need extreme corrections post-exposure. RAW isn't for fixing bad exposures and techniques, it's an aide for good techniques that call for post-exposure development.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

Oh, I didn't keep them at all. It was just the first shot that after coming from a sports event. The other pictures are near perfect from the JPGs.

I was just seeing how people get results from RAW when the picture is a completely failure on exposure. Did you use the RAW or JPG?

The ORF file.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm F0.95 Aspherical Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
diverroy
Contributing MemberPosts: 727
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

I take it that you have some kind of image editor that you can use.

Right out of the camera the RAW file will tend to look worse than a JPEG as the camera will have done some work on the JPEG image .

With RAW files you need to get them into an image editor like Photoshop then you can pull all the information from the file

-- hide signature --

Diverroy

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Tullis
Forum ProPosts: 27,563Gear list
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

brycesteiner wrote:

photofan1986 wrote:

As the others suggested, you should trash such a bad exposed picture.

However, if you insist, here is the best I can do, for a small print it should look ok.

Oh, I didn't keep it at all. It was just the first shot that after coming from a sports event. The other pictures are near perfect from the JPGs.

I was just seeing how people get results from RAW when the picture is a completely failure on exposure, and this was a good example.

Did you use the RAW or JPG? How did you get the detail if it is RAW. I don't seem to be able to pull this out in Aperture.

RAW. JPG breaks down much more readily than this broke down. In LR Exposure (brightness) was raised to +5, Shadows and Highlights both brought to +100,  a nice arc for further brightening with the center of he Tone Curve was also applied, and about 50 was dialed in for NR. Temp: 3375 / Tint +11. View full sized for best viewing of those results.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm F0.95 Aspherical Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
D200_4me
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,482Gear list
Like?
No harm done
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

Feel free to experiment and try various things if you want to learn more.  Don't let people discourage you   Making mistakes is a good way to learn, but having the wrong people critique (insult) you is a quick way to become discouraged.   If I were you, I'd shoot in manual and learn how ISO, shutter speed and aperture all make a difference in the exposure and depth of field you end up with.   It's a quick and easy want to learn because you can see the results right away as you make changes.  Then look at/try various photo editing tools (I decided on Lightroom a few years back) and then learn how to adjust photos.   Not 'edit', but adjust.  I say adjust because that would be the most important thing...simple adjustments to correct white balance or light shadows a little or bring down the highlights a little.   After that you can learn to be more creative and do the 'artsy' edits like creating those abnormal purple skies    I like an abnormal purple sky now and then, but not too often.

-- hide signature --
 D200_4me's gear list:D200_4me's gear list
Fujifilm X20 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS Fujifilm XF 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
uRebel Rob
Contributing MemberPosts: 507Gear list
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

I don't have aperture, but I'm pretty sure the basics are the same as LR. I haven't tried to do your yet, but in general in LR for an underexposed photo I want to keep, I:

Crop and rotate, if needed.

Increase exposure (to bring up the whole photo) I don't worry too much on blowing out highlights at this point.
Increase shadows (to bring up the shadows)
Decrease blacks (to increase contrast)

Then depending on if the exposure blew out the highlights or not on upping the expose, I decrease/increase highlights, and sometime adjust the whites. (I readjust the exposure, etc, a little, as they're all related, and it's pretty quick.)

Once I get within ballpark of the lights and shadows, I move to WB. WB can be a pain, especially since I'm partially red/green color blind, so I always compare the camera's "as shot" WB with LR's auto WB and with LR's day, shadow, and tungsten WBs, and almost always (for underexposured indoor shots) decide I need to adjust by eye. (Unless there's a white/grey color in the photo to use for auto sampling)

Then comes clarity (micro contrast), contrast, vibrance, and satiation, and adjust to taste. I usually keep these minimal adjustments, but I don't do food very often.

Noise, sharpness, and clean ups are last, and usually are the longest time for me. The above usually take 2-5 minutes (half being the WB). Balancing noise vs sharpness is razor sharp for me, and depends on what the final output will be. My general first pass at noise and sharpness is 15 seconds, but fine adjustments can take a couple minutes. Shot removal, object removal, gradient and radial filters, and local adjustments, if needed, take the longest. And I rarely use split toning or individual color adjustments, so they take a long time, too.

Anyway, adjusting just the exposure is usually not enough. Which is why everyone said getting it as good as possible OOC is the first step to proper PP. (Cool test project, though. Thanks for posting it. I'll see if I can try my hand at it later, but I'd guess the couple posts are better than I can do in a couple minutes.)

 uRebel Rob's gear list:uRebel Rob's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Nikon D5100 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rclatter
Forum MemberPosts: 61
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

I suspect you're asking for tips for how to even begin editing this in something like LightRoom.

Just loading it up it appears as almost a solid black image,

but with just the adjustments here shown on the right in Lightroom everything is visible.

I adjusted exposure all the way to +5, used the White Balance eye dropper tool on the sour cream, and then tweaked the levels of highlights, shadows, whites and blacks.

If I wanted to keep this photo or even publish it I would follow up with noise reduction, possibly some sharpening, and maybe tweak the color temp some to get a warmer feel.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rclatter
Forum MemberPosts: 61
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to rclatter, 9 months ago

And here's what it looks like in Lightroom without any adjustments at all - when I first loaded it in:

I still find it pretty amazing that so much detail can be reclaimed from what seems like an almost solid black image.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mingjai
Senior MemberPosts: 1,252Gear list
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

Here's my attempt to salvage the image. I struggled with WB as well, and in the end I opted for a little warmer image:

 Mingjai's gear list:Mingjai's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm 1:1.8 +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
honeyiscool
Contributing MemberPosts: 997Gear list
Like?
Re: RAW and JPG files
In reply to brycesteiner, 9 months ago

It's shots like this that make me think that more test shots should involve just the P mode with Auto ISO enabled. There is no way this shot could have been taken in any other mode than M mode with manually set Extended ISO (why, right?).

 honeyiscool's gear list:honeyiscool's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Olympus E-PL7 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads