Who uses the OOC JPG's ?

Gourownway · Jul 2, 2022

Adrian Harris said:
I read so much here regarding the various pros and cons of one RAW converter versus another and with great interest.

However I find that probably more than 95% of the time, I am so please with the out of camera Olympus jpg files, that I usually end up using those to edit.

There are exceptions of course, but that's mainly either subject dependant, or dependant on how much I want to push the processing.

Why do I do it?

... Possibly because I am a little lazy at times, but the main reason is that in my opinion for very many subjects, the Olympus out of camera JPG's are so darn good.

An example being, car shows, car and motorbike racing, air shows, and many/most townscapes.

It's really only when I am trying to squeeze out the very last bit of feather detail that I am most concerned about RAW conversion.... Or if I have made a huge exposure error! ...oh and when I take astro.

Does anyone else here frequently use just the OOC JPG's when only a little tweaking is necessary?

Good for you Adrian, I’m the same , if I get a well exposed jpg I am more than happy. I often find myself thinking that I could tweak a raw file a bit and get a bit more out of the image, but usually that’s because there is an issue with the image. When I absolutely nail an exposure the jpg is more than good enough and TBH difficult to improve on.

Elemental Photography · Jul 2, 2022

The only use I have for OOC .jpegs in my usual workflow is if I need to share from camera to smartphone for social media.

richj20 · Jul 2, 2022

My cameras are configured to record both RAW and JPG. I rarely use the RAW file.

My editing is usually just Local Area Contrast and some sharpening.

I'm happy with Panasonic colors, especially for nature photography where the colors are very natural looking.

--
Richard
http://www.rsjphoto.net/

Skeeterbytes · Jul 2, 2022

When I was actively shooting my kid's soccer--league and school--the vast number of files had me preferring LF jpegs to ORFs, because my computer was groaning under the load. Second benefit was much reduced upload and LR processing times--those are big time-sucks when replicated a few dozen times/year. Thirdly, cameras at the time hit the buffer limit easily, shooting ORFs on continuous drive.

I eventually built up a better PC stuffed with memory and drives, enabling me to transition to ORFs when it seemed appropriate. The number of matches (and running events) has dropped from flood to trickle, so I shoot ORFs almost exclusively. If ever shooting pictures by the pound again (e.g., volunteer event shots) then I won't hesitate to make it jpegs, especially if simply handing over the files to someone. They're just fine in quality, especially LSF.

Cheers,

Rick

--
Equivalence and diffraction-free since 2009.
You can be too; ask about our 12-step program.

ClaudeVoyage · Jul 2, 2022

I do 95% of my photo in jpeg, the other 5% are in raw only.

i do raw for indoor or night photos, when I want to reduce noise in DXO Photolab.

Sometime, If the subject need a high dynamic range, I take a raw photo.

victorav · Jul 2, 2022

Gnine said:
Panasonic shooter, and I use them a LOT. The G9 jpeg engine is a huge update over the previous models/versions. I'm one of those weirdos who actually likes the more realistic colours of the Panasonic flavour, and I actually started a thread a while back on this exact subject. With examples too. I'll have a look and see if I can dig it up. One of the the main reason too, why I like Silkypix, as it can reproduce the EXACT same colours and contrast etc from raw, as the in camera converter.

Why are you a weird for liking Panasonic colors? I've so many images/videos from Panasonic cameras they are quite good with pleasing colors.

Gourownway · Jul 2, 2022

Nice, and a clear demonstration that jpgs are often of sufficient quality that makes pp unnecessary.

I have thought this for a long time, but it seems there are a lot of folk on YouTube ready to tell you that you must shoot raw to be a proper photographer.

i will not deny that there are circumstances where having the raw file is valuable , for example if you have under or over exposed you have more latitude to recover detail from a raw file. However the quest for me it to get it right in camera and learn from my mistakes.

Wu Jiaqiu · Jul 2, 2022

Gourownway said:
Nice, and a clear demonstration that jpgs are often of sufficient quality that makes pp unnecessary.

I have thought this for a long time, but it seems there are a lot of folk on YouTube ready to tell you that you must shoot raw to be a proper photographer.

i will not deny that there are circumstances where having the raw file is valuable , for example if you have under or over exposed you have more latitude to recover detail from a raw file. However the quest for me it to get it right in camera and learn from my mistakes.

there is no right or wrong, whatever suits your personal taste/needs or whatever you enjoy doing

trooplewis · Jul 2, 2022

Strictly OOC jpegs for me. I like the way my G95 processes them. Usually do a couple minor tweaks in irfanview, but I don't spend more then a minute or so to deal with any particular image unless for some reason it is very special.

brentbrent · Jul 2, 2022

Adrian Harris said:
I find that probably more than 95% of the time, I am so please with the out of camera Olympus jpg files, that I usually end up using those to edit.

I've long been of the view that if one is going to edit, it's probably better to start with the more flexible raw format. I shoot raw +jpg, but generally toss the jpgs before I process the edited raws. Sometimes the jpgs are useful for a quick share online or via text message.

But the G9 does much better than previous cameras, rarely requiring me to mess with white balance, and usually producing a good exposure. My "new" E-M1 III seems pretty good too. So I'm thinking that I may need to adjust my approach and try going with OOC jpgs some of the time. I'd be hoping, however, that in those situations I wouldn't feel the need to do any editing at all.

--
Brent

gary0319 · Jul 2, 2022

When I was a Canon shooter I always preferred the raw because, IMO, the Canon JPEGS were not so good. After discovering Olympus JPEG colors and LSF, I shot mostly JPEGS. But, over the years I migrated to raw + JPEG and settled into the Raw is better camp.

Now, however, I’m beginning to rethink my old school “raw is always better” particularly as we move to more and more in-camera computational processing. HHHR 25 and 50 mpx JPEGS are so good that I no longer even look at the Raws.. Handheld Starlight JPEGS are so hard to even come close to from the Raws that it’s no longer worth the effort. And the improved JPEG engine in my OM-1 has me constantly really having to look really close to find the difference between the JPEG and the processed Raws…. even at better than 100% crops.

It’s getting hard to not use the JPEGS as my baseline for evaluating image quality.

Gourownway · Jul 2, 2022

Wu Jiaqiu said:
Gourownway said:

Nice, and a clear demonstration that jpgs are often of sufficient quality that makes pp unnecessary.

I have thought this for a long time, but it seems there are a lot of folk on YouTube ready to tell you that you must shoot raw to be a proper photographer.

i will not deny that there are circumstances where having the raw file is valuable , for example if you have under or over exposed you have more latitude to recover detail from a raw file. However the quest for me it to get it right in camera and learn from my mistakes.

Click to expand...

there is no right or wrong, whatever suits your personal taste/needs or whatever you enjoy doing

--
the computer says no

i do not think I was suggesting there was a right or a wrong.

however there plenty that do argue one way or another for what is right.

acfo · Jul 2, 2022

Adrian Harris said:
I read so much here regarding the various pros and cons of one RAW converter versus another and with great interest.

However I find that probably more than 95% of the time, I am so please with the out of camera Olympus jpg files, that I usually end up using those to edit.

There are exceptions of course, but that's mainly either subject dependant, or dependant on how much I want to push the processing.

Why do I do it?

... Possibly because I am a little lazy at times, but the main reason is that in my opinion for very many subjects, the Olympus out of camera JPG's are so darn good.

Same here. I try to get it right in camera and 95% of the time cannot be bothered to fiddle around with post processing.

If I do need to do post processing (crop, align, etc. or for printing) I will however use the raw files because I prefer a lossless workflow.

richj20 · Jul 2, 2022

Gourownway said:
Nice, and a clear demonstration that jpgs are often of sufficient quality that makes pp unnecessary.

Thank you.

Gourownway said:
I have thought this for a long time, but it seems there are a lot of folk on YouTube ready to tell you that you must shoot raw to be a proper photographer.

Big mistake (IMHO) to consult YouTube for what you "must do."

Gourownway said:
i will not deny that there are circumstances where having the raw file is valuable , for example if you have under or over exposed you have more latitude to recover detail from a raw file.

Agreed, and adjusting for dynamic range is my primary use.

ahaslett · Jul 2, 2022

Gourownway said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:

Gourownway said:

Nice, and a clear demonstration that jpgs are often of sufficient quality that makes pp unnecessary.

I have thought this for a long time, but it seems there are a lot of folk on YouTube ready to tell you that you must shoot raw to be a proper photographer.

i will not deny that there are circumstances where having the raw file is valuable , for example if you have under or over exposed you have more latitude to recover detail from a raw file. However the quest for me it to get it right in camera and learn from my mistakes.

Click to expand...

there is no right or wrong, whatever suits your personal taste/needs or whatever you enjoy doing

Click to expand...

i do not think I was suggesting there was a right or a wrong.

however there plenty that do argue one way or another for what is right.

Possibly your comment about over and under exposure, which isn’t how a RAW shooter thinks about ISO.

I’m also not arguing which is best, but if you are going to process your jpegs, you might as well shoot RAW and have a standard default profile. Indeed, if you use OWS, you start from the jpeg settings and have access to AI noise reduction.

I don’t use OWS, but it’s on my desktop just in case. PhotoLab has better NR and C1 is easier to use.

Andrew

Impulses · Jul 2, 2022

I use even my GX850's SOOC JPEGs all the time (and they're not tuned quite as well as my E-M5 III's). Why? Very often I wanna share a photo long before I've had time to sit down and process the RAWs, that's all. If I'm gonna do any editing at all I'd rather start with the RAW file, but shooting RAW + JPEG or having the option to process RAWs in camera is nice for expediency and quick sharing. I wish my FF body had in camera RAW processing... /smh

These days I could probably move to shooting RAW only and processing JPEGs on demand in-camera as I need them (couldn't have done that with the GM1 as it didn't have that capability IIRC), but IIRC there isn't a major speed or buffer penalty to shooting RAW + JPEG on either of my M4/3 bodies, whereas there is one on my FF body (a pretty significant one, it's slow af saving creating JPEGs) but it lacks in camera on demand RAW processing, go figure.

shinndigg · Jul 2, 2022

Pretty most of the time

bluevellet · Jul 2, 2022

Adrian Harris said:
I read so much here regarding the various pros and cons of one RAW converter versus another and with great interest.

However I find that probably more than 95% of the time, I am so please with the out of camera Olympus jpg files, that I usually end up using those to edit.

There are exceptions of course, but that's mainly either subject dependant, or dependant on how much I want to push the processing.

Why do I do it?

... Possibly because I am a little lazy at times, but the main reason is that in my opinion for very many subjects, the Olympus out of camera JPG's are so darn good.

An example being, car shows, car and motorbike racing, air shows, and many/most townscapes.

It's really only when I am trying to squeeze out the very last bit of feather detail that I am most concerned about RAW conversion.... Or if I have made a huge exposure error! ...oh and when I take astro.

Does anyone else here frequently use just the OOC JPG's when only a little tweaking is necessary?

I shoot JPEG and RAW. Obviously, if something looks off (white balance, clipped highlights, underexposure), I'll work with the RAW files to fix it.

But otherwise, the JPEGs are my benchmark. I'll work with most RAW files and try to create a better image than the original JPEG. Usually, the image can be improved upon somewhat, but sometimes, the in-camera JPEGs just nailed it and I have to admit defeat in my attempt to better them.

I keep the best JPEGs and discard the inferior duplicates. I keep some of the RAW files, usually of the best pictures (or the most problematic ones) for possible future uses as you never know with future software advances.

Trevor Carpenter · Jul 2, 2022

Isn't there a factor being overlooked here. I've been exclusively jpeg since I got the OM-1 and being a new camera I have shot many things that wouldn't normally interest me. For most frame fillers, jpeg is very good and I have no need for much editing, this includes, buildings, the garden, interior shots and even for my moth pictures jpeg results can be acceptable. The latter are normally shot in early morning light.

For planes which are usually shot nearer the middle of the day jpegs are often good but with any shadows really needing raw. BIFs are the big issue. I rarely fill the frame, contrast between the bird and the background is often harsh, shadow can be a serious problem and most of all It's not unusual for the combination of me and the camera to get the exposure wrong, often underexposing while sometimes over exposing.

I often wonder whether the people who say "I just try and get it right in camera" have ever shot BIFs where as well as the exposure, composition isn't always a luxury you have time to think about, especially if the background is frequently changing from dark to light and back again.

What I am trying to say is I wonder if there is any correlation between the jpeg and raw camps and the subject matter and light conditions that most interests them..

ahaslett · Jul 2, 2022

Trevor Carpenter said:
Isn't there a factor being overlooked here. I've been exclusively jpeg since I got the OM-1 and being a new camera I have shot many things that wouldn't normally interest me. For most frame fillers, jpeg is very good and I have no need for much editing, this includes, buildings, the garden, interior shots and even for my moth pictures jpeg results can be acceptable. The latter are normally shot in early morning light.

For planes which are usually shot nearer the middle of the day jpegs are often good but with any shadows really needing raw. BIFs are the big issue. I rarely fill the frame, contrast between the bird and the background is often harsh, shadow can be a serious problem and most of all It's not unusual for the combination of me and the camera to get the exposure wrong, often underexposing while sometimes over exposing.

I often wonder whether the people who say "I just try and get it right in camera" have ever shot BIFs where as well as the exposure, composition isn't always a luxury you have time to think about, especially if the background is frequently changing from dark to light and back again.

What I am trying to say is I wonder if there is any correlation between the jpeg and raw camps and the subject matter and light conditions that most interests them..

Seems like a good point.

Andrew

Who uses the OOC JPG's ?

Well-known member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Wu Jiaqiu

Guest

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts