Reading mode: Light Dark

jpegs are underexposed but not raw?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy Z
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
J

Jimmy Z

Guest
For some reason I find that when I shoot Raw with a small jpeg the jpeg is underexposed but the raw file opens without any adjustment and is exposed properly. I shoot in manual mode and the exposure is correct. What gives?
jim
 
You may want to check your parameters settings - if you had some strange settings loaded, I think you would see it on the jpeg and not on the raw...

Trebor
Jimmy Z said:
For some reason I find that when I shoot Raw with a small jpeg the
jpeg is underexposed but the raw file opens without any adjustment
and is exposed properly. I shoot in manual mode and the exposure is
correct. What gives?
jim
Click to expand...
 
Trebor Heminway said:
Trebor
Jimmy Z said:
For some reason I find that when I shoot Raw with a small jpeg the
jpeg is underexposed but the raw file opens without any adjustment
and is exposed properly. I shoot in manual mode and the exposure is
correct. What gives?
jim
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Well I am glad to know that this is not something that everyone is experienceing on the MK2. I am sorry but what is a ACR setting?

Is there a place that I can download different TCF settings? I am only intersted in skin tones. lso is it best to leave the MK2 on +2/3 exposure comp?
jim
 
Jeff S said:
I'm sorry I just assumed your were using Photoshop CS I should not
have..

Jeff S
WB9ZPO

Click to expand...
Dah! I just had a brain fart. lol yes I am using ACR which for some reason I perfer over C1 I know I am the only person but after trying C1 for 30 days I just found ACR to be better.
jim
 
Jimmy,

I was refering to the camera parameter settings like sharpness, contrast, tone ect... Make sure they are at default levels. Others have mentioned the raw conversion settings. Both places should be checked as possible sources of the problem. I would figure this out before going with any EC changes (maybe you have??). FYI - I only need EC if im metering classic fake out conditions like a white shirt or a backlight subject and of course varies with metering mode.

Good luck
Trebor
Jimmy Z said:
Trebor Heminway said:
Trebor
Jimmy Z said:
For some reason I find that when I shoot Raw with a small jpeg the
jpeg is underexposed but the raw file opens without any adjustment
and is exposed properly. I shoot in manual mode and the exposure is
correct. What gives?
jim
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Well I am glad to know that this is not something that everyone is
experienceing on the MK2. I am sorry but what is a ACR setting?
Is there a place that I can download different TCF settings? I am
only intersted in skin tones. lso is it best to leave the MK2 on
+2/3 exposure comp?
jim
Click to expand...
 
Jimmy Z said:
For some reason I find that when I shoot Raw with a small jpeg the
jpeg is underexposed but the raw file opens without any adjustment
and is exposed properly. I shoot in manual mode and the exposure is
correct. What gives?
jim
Click to expand...
-No one else seems to have this problem? I just dont understand what is set wrong. the jpegs are dark and poor color but the raw looks good and exposed correctly without any raw conversion adjustments. Is it because I am using Raw plus small jpeg set to 5?
jim
 
Jimmy Z said:
Jimmy Z said:
For some reason I find that when I shoot Raw with a small jpeg the
jpeg is underexposed but the raw file opens without any adjustment
and is exposed properly. I shoot in manual mode and the exposure is
correct. What gives?
jim
Click to expand...
-No one else seems to have this problem? I just dont understand
what is set wrong. the jpegs are dark and poor color but the raw
looks good and exposed correctly without any raw conversion
adjustments. Is it because I am using Raw plus small jpeg set to 5?
jim
Click to expand...
Hi Jim,

Have you reached any conclusion on this subject? Strangely I have the same problem on my 1D Mark II. Today I was shooting a marathon and I had to manually overexpose the pictures to get detail.

--
MarioPro
http://www.marioprophoto.com
 
post a full raw file and the jpg that went with it. Don't embed it but put up a link to each so we can download them and look at them because it doesn't make any logical sense to get a good raw if your exposure is bad for the jpg or visa versa. It makes sense that you can GET the raw to look good, but initially it has the same exposure as the jpg if your camera is set to all standard settings. Do a manual reset on your camera (see the manual) to reset all functions to factory default, take a RAW + JPG and post them for us to download.
 
santa said:
post a full raw file and the jpg that went with it. Don't embed it
but put up a link to each so we can download them and look at them
because it doesn't make any logical sense to get a good raw if your
exposure is bad for the jpg or visa versa. It makes sense that you
can GET the raw to look good, but initially it has the same
exposure as the jpg if your camera is set to all standard settings.
Do a manual reset on your camera (see the manual) to reset all
functions to factory default, take a RAW + JPG and post them for us
to download.
Click to expand...
Hi Santa,

Thanks for your reply. I'll do so, despite I have no special costumization in my camera, but I will do it. I was just captioning the pictures from today and I was terribly disapointed, as any one would, if found that working with the 10D and the 1D MKII at the same time, on the same event, working on M or Tv modes and the 10D got better balanced pictures, I mean, color, exposure and contrast. No speciual setting on both.

Now let me do some Reset and later post a RAW and Jpeg.

--
MarioPro
http://www.marioprophoto.com
 
Jimmy Z said:
Jimmy Z said:
For some reason I find that when I shoot Raw with a small jpeg the
jpeg is underexposed but the raw file opens without any adjustment
and is exposed properly. I shoot in manual mode and the exposure is
correct. What gives?
jim
Click to expand...
-No one else seems to have this problem? I just dont understand
what is set wrong. the jpegs are dark and poor color but the raw
looks good and exposed correctly without any raw conversion
adjustments. Is it because I am using Raw plus small jpeg set to 5?
jim
Click to expand...
--

I just started having this problem also. I do believe it is related to messing with the parameters after reading a post on one of the other photo forums recently.

I'm confident that if I reset my parameters all will be well again.

I only use the jpg's for viewing to determine which files I want to process through Adobe Camera Raw.

Jack
 
Mário Proença said:
Back with the images as per Sanat request. I reset all the
parmeters (in fact I had almost all to default except some Cfns.
before) and now I took a set of pictures with the camera as it came
from the store.
Click to expand...
The first thing I see is the jpg is underexposed by about a stop. You can see that when you open the Levels in Photoshop. The historgram is not pushed to the right as far as it can go, and if you want to bright white building in the center to be fully white, that is what is needed. Of course, ultimately how bright you want it is up to you, but proper exposure of a digital image should normally be pushed right as much as possible with white objects in the frame. So your premise that the jpgs are properly exposed is questionable. The raw is almost downloaded....and it is virtually identical. View both histograms in Photoshop. You would expect the jpg to be slightly different and it is, but only slightly. Maybe a quarter of a stop off, but that is easily attributed to whatever Canon does to a jpg to ensure it is not blown out. Emperically, the histogram shows they are, for all intents and purposes, the same. I don't see the issue.

The images also looked identical on my screen. Here is a capture of the two histograms. I think the jpg is on top. The highlights are a very small bit less bright. Less than a third a stop, I'd guess.

 
santa said:
Mário Proença said:
Back with the images as per Sanat request. I reset all the
parmeters (in fact I had almost all to default except some Cfns.
before) and now I took a set of pictures with the camera as it came
from the store.
Click to expand...
The first thing I see is the jpg is underexposed by about a stop.
You can see that when you open the Levels in Photoshop. The
historgram is not pushed to the right as far as it can go, and if
you want to bright white building in the center to be fully white,
that is what is needed. Of course, ultimately how bright you want
it is up to you, but proper exposure of a digital image should
normally be pushed right as much as possible with white objects in
the frame. So your premise that the jpgs are properly exposed is
questionable. The raw is almost downloaded....and it is virtually
identical. View both histograms in Photoshop. You would expect the
jpg to be slightly different and it is, but only slightly. Maybe a
quarter of a stop off, but that is easily attributed to whatever
Canon does to a jpg to ensure it is not blown out. Emperically, the
histogram shows they are, for all intents and purposes, the same. I
don't see the issue.
The images also looked identical on my screen. Here is a capture of
the two histograms. I think the jpg is on top. The highlights are a
very small bit less bright. Less than a third a stop, I'd guess.

Click to expand...
Hi Santa,

Thanks for your help and sorry for the delay in my reply but I had a few problems with the ISP but now it is ok.

That 1stop difference is what is "killing" me. I was shooting with the 10D and the 1DMKII and the images of the 10D were comming out with more reliable histograms.

Well, I think I'll proceed with more tests in the next two weeks and if I feel that I'm not liking the result I'll consult the CPS for some help or even an equipment change/repair.

Thanks again! :)

--
MarioPro
http://www.marioprophoto.com
 
my best guess is the difference between these two is about 1/8 of a stop. Maybe a 1/3 of a stop but I don't think even that much. The jpg is a bit more conservative in the recorded exposure. I don't know if that is an intentional thing, but it sounds reasonbly smart given the inability to recover highlights in a jpg. On a simply personal note, I don't see enough of a difference to raise any concern and wouldn't mind my jpgs being 1/8 of a stop less exposed than a raw file. If you do chat with Canon about this please post the results and if you have the time, drop me an email so I don't miss the final results. I'd appreciate it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top