-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Post processing JPEGs?
- Thread starter EMV
- Start date
Sal Baker
Forum Pro
Any editing program should allow you to save the edited jpeg as a lossless file.
Sal
Moreover Google is not your friend. They are spying on you most of the time.
[/QUOTE]
I made this suggestion, after searching the forum for GIMP and not finding it. Sorry for the redundant post.thank you
Fuji X Raw Studio seems not worth the time to download, from what I've read.
Don't be scared by "avoid editing JPEG" advice because it is unlikely you need to save photos at 6000x4000 pixels anyway. The main reasons to work with Raw (RAF) are to get wider dynamic range, or different effects, than you can achieve in JPEG.
Last edited:
Well, now that we have 24 megapixels, who cares. Nobody wants 6000x4000 pixels on the web.
But... lossiness is already there in out-of-camera JPEG. Merely saving it as TIFF is not going to help the original lossiness, only subsequent re-artifacting.
If you use GIMP, this can be largely avoided without going through the extra step and using so much storage space. TIFFs are huge.
Last edited:
KKJohn
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,138
- Reaction score
- 778
Unfortunately FastStone doesn't work on my iMac.
ialarmedalien
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,182
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 863
Your situation sounds pretty similar to mine—I shoot RAW+JPG, but for most pics, I just use the SOOC JPG and do any little tweaks with DxO since I also use it to browse through my photos. DxO has a pretty nice collection of presets that make it easy to apply sets of transforms (HDR style, various different B+W settings, "moods", etc.). I have the RAW files so that if there are bigger adjustments to be made, I can easily reprocess them.
The best way to work out what settings suit your photos is probably to download the Fujifilm X Raw Studio and experiment on some RAW files. Most people recommend turning down the noise reduction as it's quite heavy-handed. The shadows/highlights/colour settings are dependent on what film sim you're using, the style of photos you take, and what your preferences are. For Velvia, I use -1Hi / -1Lo, but that may not be suitable for you.
a_c_skinner
Forum Pro
There is, though, a decent time saving.
Not really. If you're editing anything at all, it's the same. You can set up programs for batch processing, so a basic development can be applied when they're imported and if you want to do a basic contrast/levels adjustment for each image and move on to batch conversion to jpg, there is no difference between your personal effort between jpg and raw.
Okay, I will probablt aim to shoot pure SOOC for JPEGs and if i want to edit som picture i will edit the raw file.
Yes I will try that and I agree the NR at 0 is pretty much. I think you can have it at between -4 and -2 depending on the picture. I dont think the Hi setting makes much diffrence. The Lo does though, almost to much for every step. But It's easy to just make an adjustment in x raw studio for the picture you feel missing something.
Sal Baker
Forum Pro
Nobody? Many photographers care and don't buy a 25mp camera and expensive prime to post on the web. My primary output is for large prints up to 20x30 inches.
Exactly what I thought you were talking about.
How does GIMP avoid this? What is the output file type?
Sal
That would be at 300 DPI, which is ideal for my Canon inkjet, although it does not accept paper that large. UHD monitors are getting affordable but only 3840x2160.
The JPEG FAQ [10] says "if you decompress and recompress an image at the same
quality setting first used, relatively little further degradation occurs." GIMP has a setting for that (use quality settings from original image):
Last edited:
Sal Baker
Forum Pro
I guess it depends on your needs. For large prints I find the second generation of jpeg compression to be delitorious to the final IQ. I highly recommend against the practice for high-quality imaging. If one must do this (rather than saving in a lossless format) it’s easy enough to just save in the highest quality compression option in any editing software.That would be at 300 DPI, which is ideal for my Canon inkjet, although it does not accept paper that large. UHD monitors are getting affordable but only 3840x2160.
The JPEG FAQ [10] says "if you decompress and recompress an image at the same
quality setting first used, relatively little further degradation occurs." GIMP has a setting for that (use quality settings from original image):
Sal
I tested with the Difference layer, and using GIMP the second generation is almost the same; only minor pixels here and there due to rounding errors. The third and subsequent JPEG generations are identical.
In the whitewater kayaking business (if it can be called a business) most photos are sent to me in JPEG format, taken by cameras that don't shoot Raw. The pro photographers who stand by the side of a river and sell their action sequences never shoot Raw - it is too slow and takes up too much space.
Last edited:
Mavry
Well-known member
With cameras that don't shoot Raw? Point & Shoot then? Cellphones?
Most professional whitewater photographers shoot with Canon DSLR and telephoto zoom lens, from what I've seen. Considering the number of shots per day, there is no frickin' way Raw workflow is practical. A courier swims back to the front office with SD card so customers can see their whitewater photos before going home.
I believe Olympus TG5 was the first "tough" camera to have Raw mode. So until recently it wasn't even possible to get Raw images from a waterproof camera.
Last edited:
Miguel-C
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,323
- Reaction score
- 2,685
I came here to post this, Darktable is pretty great.darktable is free/open-source, works on Linux, OSX, and Windows. It's very similar to LR (a lot of people even called it a LR-clone
https://www.darktable.org/
But, as krassphoto mentioned, editing JPGs will only degrade them, some editors will degrade them even just opening and resaving (due to JPG compression). And then, there're settings that only available with RAW such as changing white balance or boosting shadow from complete blackness (think about 256 values/pixel in 8-bit JPG vs 4096 values/pixel in 12-bit RAW).
darktable treats JPG and RAW similarly so you can work with either, though, RAW files are treated as first-class citizen and processed in 32-bit pipelines until the final export, so you have all the RAW data available for manipulation through out.
I can process around 100 RAWs in 2-4 hours with darktable (including culling/picking). If the photos are of similar shooting condition, lots of the settings can be copied and pasted to the whole set (white balance, base curve, ..). A bunch of other settings are applied automatically as part of darktable workflow: lens correction, noise reduction, default sharpening.
And if you have a decent graphic card/GPU, that can speeds up darktable multiple times (7x faster for me with GTX 1050Ti comparing to just i5-7300HQ alone).
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum