Poll: your camera output (JPEG / settings, RAW / processing approach)

[Dessert First]

For JPEG you have options for default settings, recommended settings, and settings that are often tweaked, but a glaring omission is JPEG settings that are optimized by the photographer, and then mostly left alone and certainly not often tweaked. Most, but not all, JPEG shooters, who know what they are doing adjust the default JPEG settings to their liking and then at most tweak them occasionally. By eliminating this most common option I think you have an invalid poll.

What settings are you referring to? I am unaware of any camera specified JPEG settings other than quality (compression).

An example would be several high level settings such as natural, bright, vibrant, etc, and then within each of those such settings color saturation, Hue, contrast, sharpness, and one or more settings that help prevent blown highlights or ability to recover details from shadows.

Those types of settings aren't JPEG specific. As a JPEG shooter I realize that most of these can (and I'd argue should) be done in post-processing, not in-camera. You are correct that when shooting JPEG you might set certain parameters a little differently, but I don't see how that invalidates the question of how you normally do post-processing. Unless you're trying to formulate a quantitative response to that question.

Those settings could be implemented in camera , or after camera during PP, but they are JPG SPECIFIC - they do not affect RAW

I think the reason you're thinking of these parameters as JPEG parameters is because they control image processing that occurs in-camera. The fact that most cameras produce JPEGs from in-camera processing does not mean the parameters are specific to JPEGs. Cameras may also output other formats (TIFF, BMP) but that doesn't make them TIFF or BMP parameters either. That was the main reason for my confusion because the only user-settable parameter that affects the JPEG compression is the quality factor. Everything else occurs before JPEG compression is applied and is totally independent of the compression method used, so it does not make sense to refer to them as being specific to the JPEG format. The fact that the parameters don't affect RAW does not make them JPEG specific. They are in-camera processing specific.

 

[Bhima78]

But I find the JPEGs Oly produces are already so much closer to what I want, that I actually spend alot less time in ACR/Lighroom because of it. I like doing PP as much as the next guy, but this can get very time consuming... especially if a big portion of photos aren't specifically for work but are just shots to capture memories with friends and family. I only break out RAW for work to make sure I have maximum latitude and hey, I'm paid by the hour so endlessly tweaking shots is a good thing.

 

[RedDog Steve]

I think the reason you're thinking of these parameters as JPEG parameters is because they control image processing that occurs in-camera. The fact that most cameras produce JPEGs from in-camera processing does not mean the parameters are specific to JPEGs. Cameras may also output other formats (TIFF, BMP) but that doesn't make them TIFF or BMP parameters either. That was the main reason for my confusion because the only user-settable parameter that affects the JPEG compression is the quality factor. Everything else occurs before JPEG compression is applied and is totally independent of the compression method used, so it does not make sense to refer to them as being specific to the JPEG format. The fact that the parameters don't affect RAW does not make them JPEG specific. They are in-camera processing specific.

Interesting.

Are there actually any u4/3 bodies that output files other than RAW and JPG ?

rd

 

[traveler_101]

. . . I know the prevailing school of thought is to minimize in camera processing if one is going to process the JPEGs, but that does not work best for me with sharpness being the exception. If I think a particular shot might benefit from being taken in RAW mode I will do both RAW and JPEG, but for the majority of shots, RAW has no advantage for me and just means more work in processing

I am interested in your perspective. There was a guy on this forum who I haven't seen post for some time, Almaric, who argues that making in camera adjustments and doing almost no pp is the name of a game. What parameters do you play with when shooting jogs?

 

[roadtrpr]

. . . I know the prevailing school of thought is to minimize in camera processing if one is going to process the JPEGs, but that does not work best for me with sharpness being the exception. If I think a particular shot might benefit from being taken in RAW mode I will do both RAW and JPEG, but for the majority of shots, RAW has no advantage for me and just means more work in processing

I am interested in your perspective. There was a guy on this forum who I haven't seen post for some time, Almaric, who argues that making in camera adjustments and doing almost no pp is the name of a game. What parameters do you play with when shooting jogs?

I think each person has to work out what works best for them given the camera and software they have, as well as their disposition toward post processing. A major factor is how good their camera's in camera PP is.

To answer your question about myself, though, I found that with my camera I can get out of camera JPEGs that with a little quick PP are sufficient for my needs. My camera, which is not a micro four thirds, has high level JPEG settings of natural, bright, and vibrant. Natural is very conservative and what they call bright is just fine for me. I then set saturation, contrast, and sharpness to my liking along with settings that affect highlights and details in shadows.

I find that I can usually get a final product in PP with quick adjustments to curves, white balance, shadow detail recovery, clarity, and unsharp mask. All of those are not always needed and sometimes other tools are needed. I would guess it takes about 30 - 45 s to PP an ordinary photo.

 

[43Shooter]

None of the above
Cheksa wrote:
You're evil Ulfric.

Ditto for me. RAW + jpeg, I throw away most of the RAWs but keep the ones I like most and edit with Lightroom/Photoshop.

 

[Lights]

I had a similar reaction to lack of my preferred option in the poll. I shoot jpegs in a normal, minimally sharpened way, with noise filter set to low. I then post process my jpegs if I wish to add contrast or make other adjustments, including conversion to monochrome.