Amazed with JPEG...!

After some questions this day in this forum about RAW and JPEG, I must commit that now I've tried to use JPEG instead of RAW, the results are great. I didn't dare to shoot in JPEG because of not been able to correct the images afterwards. But now after taken several shots with the preset WB of the 10D...they are stunning.

I did do some WB compensation in PS using the levels-tool (White-point, this is a great help), some sharpness correction, crop and profile converting for printing, but the output on my Canon i950 is very good. Most of these things I would normally do in C1 with RAW, but I must say the results are the almost/maybe the same.

With JPEG there are several things which can be used, e.g. WB bracketing, and you can shoot with drive-mode a lot of action shots, almost like a movie...in combination with AI Servo AF the shots I've taken were sharp and focussed at the right place (EF 24-70 f2.8L).

in 99% of the case you can't tell the difference between RAW and JPEG.

I like to be able to take 3x more pictures, and the post processing is also easier and faster.

And I certainly agree with your other comments, like the WB bracketing and drive mode.

For me RAW is not worth the trouble, au contraire !

RVO said:

After some questions this day in this forum about RAW and JPEG, I
must commit that now I've tried to use JPEG instead of RAW, the
results are great. I didn't dare to shoot in JPEG because of not
been able to correct the images afterwards. But now after taken
several shots with the preset WB of the 10D...they are stunning.

I did do some WB compensation in PS using the levels-tool
(White-point, this is a great help), some sharpness correction,
crop and profile converting for printing, but the output on my
Canon i950 is very good. Most of these things I would normally do
in C1 with RAW, but I must say the results are the almost/maybe the
same.

With JPEG there are several things which can be used, e.g. WB
bracketing, and you can shoot with drive-mode a lot of action
shots, almost like a movie...in combination with AI Servo AF the
shots I've taken were sharp and focussed at the right place (EF
24-70 f2.8L).

Click to expand...

--
-Christophe
http://www.ctesti.com/Photo

I have a friend who owns a 10D and 1D. He says he almost always shoots RAW with the 1D, but he doesn't feel it's worth the extra trouble with the 10D.

If you get the WB right, I think fine jpg works great.

RVO said:

With JPEG there are several things which can be used, e.g. WB
bracketing, and you can shoot with drive-mode a lot of action
shots, almost like a movie...in combination with AI Servo AF the
shots I've taken were sharp and focussed at the right place (EF
24-70 f2.8L).

Click to expand...

WB bracketing is unnecessary with raw, since you can specify the WB during post-processing, and simply develop (in C1 parlance) three (or more) different JPEGs from the same raw data. Continuous drive mode and AI Servo AF works in raw mode just as with JPEGs too, although I do wish future Canon DSLRs would have the ability to review all your images while the buffer is still being written to flash.

Yep, jpegs out of the camera are terrific! The only time I use RAW is when I'm not SURE if my WB is going to work. And also for shots I KNOW are important (family shots for people, etc) I use RAW because it is insurance. Other than that, jpeg all the way, baby!

RVO said:

After some questions this day in this forum about RAW and JPEG, I
must commit that now I've tried to use JPEG instead of RAW, the
results are great. I didn't dare to shoot in JPEG because of not
been able to correct the images afterwards. But now after taken
several shots with the preset WB of the 10D...they are stunning.

I did do some WB compensation in PS using the levels-tool
(White-point, this is a great help), some sharpness correction,
crop and profile converting for printing, but the output on my
Canon i950 is very good. Most of these things I would normally do
in C1 with RAW, but I must say the results are the almost/maybe the
same.

With JPEG there are several things which can be used, e.g. WB
bracketing, and you can shoot with drive-mode a lot of action
shots, almost like a movie...in combination with AI Servo AF the
shots I've taken were sharp and focussed at the right place (EF
24-70 f2.8L).

Click to expand...

As people have said, generally you can't tell the difference. However, sometime if you make large changes to the curves, the artifacts can start to become a problem due to the fact that you're amplifying the difference between neighbouring 8 x 8 blocks.

The main reason that this becomes a problem is due to the limited dynamic range. JPEGs are limited to 8-bits per pixel per colour plane. That's not quite enough.

Whatever has happened to JPEG2000? While it's computationally demanding, it can achieve higher compression rates and supports greater than 8 bits per pixel per channel. It also has a host of other nice features lacking in JPEG.

The only times I use JPG are when I am running out of Card memory, or I want to take a lot of pictures in rapid succession. Otherwise, I would never use JPEG at all. Unless you set the contrast to -2, and/or use a negative exposure compensation, JPEGs blow out constantly on the 10D.

Don't forget, the choice is not RAW vs JPEG; the choice is RAW+JPEG vs JPEG alone!
--
John

Wasn't my intention to imply that jpg is better or equal to RAW, only that I only shoot jpg.... but, I do agree. Where I think the tide would turn for me would be if PSP or PS could work with the RAW images rather than the having to use Canon's crappy software or C1, which I also think isn't good enough to pay the money for (in my minimal biased opinion).

But, I will also have to say that a couple of my favorite portraits were one of the few photos I've taken in RAW... but they aren't that much better. lol

Jim

RVO said:

After some questions this day in this forum about RAW and JPEG, I
must commit that now I've tried to use JPEG instead of RAW, the
results are great. I didn't dare to shoot in JPEG because of not
been able to correct the images afterwards. But now after taken
several shots with the preset WB of the 10D...they are stunning.

I did do some WB compensation in PS using the levels-tool
(White-point, this is a great help), some sharpness correction,
crop and profile converting for printing, but the output on my
Canon i950 is very good. Most of these things I would normally do
in C1 with RAW, but I must say the results are the almost/maybe the
same.

With JPEG there are several things which can be used, e.g. WB
bracketing, and you can shoot with drive-mode a lot of action
shots, almost like a movie...in combination with AI Servo AF the
shots I've taken were sharp and focussed at the right place (EF
24-70 f2.8L).

Click to expand...

--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

I agree that the10D processor does a great job of pumping out JPEGs - specially if you set the sharpness to +2.

The problem comes later when you go to edit the JPEG. Each time you open a JPEG and save it again as a JPEG the compression will take something away from the original image each time.

You can avoid most of that by opening the JPEG in Photoshop and saving it as an uncompressed tiff or PSD copy and then use that new image for all your adjustments.

That way you get the advantage of small size in the CF card and whatever image degradation you get from the first convertion to JPEG will be the only degradation in the process.

Shutter. said:

Wasn't my intention to imply that jpg is better or equal to RAW,
only that I only shoot jpg.... but, I do agree. Where I think the
tide would turn for me would be if PSP or PS could work with the
RAW images rather than the having to use Canon's crappy software or
C1, which I also think isn't good enough to pay the money for (in
my minimal biased opinion).

But, I will also have to say that a couple of my favorite portraits
were one of the few photos I've taken in RAW... but they aren't
that much better. lol

Click to expand...

That all depends. First of all, the art of converting from RAW is still in its infancy. Better ways will be found to convert RAW files. If all you have is a JPEG, you can't benefit from future developments, because you're using the conversion built into the camera.

Canon RAW files have detail that gets washed out in JPEGs with normal contrast settings. There are 1.6 stops of red, 1.1 stops of green, and 0.9 stops of blue highlights that are clipped at 255 in a JPEG, on a 10D. You never know when you take a picture whether or not you might want to expose for the highlights or the shadows when you see the image on the monitor. Shooting in RAW gives you those options. I have so many pictures that I would have trashed had they not been shot in RAW mode; over-expose highlights, under-exposed pictures that would have posterized and exaggerated the JPEG artifacts if corrected with "Levels" from a JPEG. The only time my camera shoots JPEG is when I am running out of card space, or I need rapid-fire shooting that would over-run the buffer in RAW mode.

John

Cisco Kid said:

I agree that the10D processor does a great job of pumping out JPEGs

• specially if you set the sharpness to +2.

The problem comes later when you go to edit the JPEG. Each time you
open a JPEG and save it again as a JPEG the compression will take
something away from the original image each time.

You can avoid most of that by opening the JPEG in Photoshop and
saving it as an uncompressed tiff or PSD copy and then use that new
image for all your adjustments.

That way you get the advantage of small size in the CF card and
whatever image degradation you get from the first convertion to
JPEG will be the only degradation in the process.

Click to expand...

--
Please visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/lonnit/root

and offer your comments. The fastest way for me to learn is when you tell me what I'm doing right and what I'm doing wrong, what you like and what you don't. I welcome all opinions.



WARNING: 10D-itis is contagious!!!!!!!

I do love you style of shooting, quite professional!

lonnit said:

Cisco Kid said:

I agree that the10D processor does a great job of pumping out JPEGs

• specially if you set the sharpness to +2.

The problem comes later when you go to edit the JPEG. Each time you
open a JPEG and save it again as a JPEG the compression will take
something away from the original image each time.

You can avoid most of that by opening the JPEG in Photoshop and
saving it as an uncompressed tiff or PSD copy and then use that new
image for all your adjustments.

That way you get the advantage of small size in the CF card and
whatever image degradation you get from the first convertion to
JPEG will be the only degradation in the process.

Click to expand...

--
Please visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/lonnit/root
and offer your comments. The fastest way for me to learn is when
you tell me what I'm doing right and what I'm doing wrong, what you
like and what you don't. I welcome all opinions.



WARNING: 10D-itis is contagious!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

How much bigger is the file once you've done that though?

Cisco Kid said:

I agree that the10D processor does a great job of pumping out JPEGs

• specially if you set the sharpness to +2.

The problem comes later when you go to edit the JPEG. Each time you
open a JPEG and save it again as a JPEG the compression will take
something away from the original image each time.

You can avoid most of that by opening the JPEG in Photoshop and
saving it as an uncompressed tiff or PSD copy and then use that new
image for all your adjustments.

That way you get the advantage of small size in the CF card and
whatever image degradation you get from the first convertion to
JPEG will be the only degradation in the process.

Click to expand...