RAW vs JPEG - Pros and Cons.
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 07. 2024
- Nick Rains demonstrates the incredible shadow depth of an underexposed raw file, but also adds some real world advice about how Jpegs can in fact be a perfectly OK format to shoot in - as long as you are aware of the limits.
Learn more at the Leica Akademie Australia: leica-akademie.com.au/
Details of the full Applied Lightroom Course can be found here:
www.leica-akademie.com.au/applied-lightroom-course - Krátké a kreslené filmy
Absolutely crystal clear explanation to an easily confusing misunderstood subject
Many thanks for this very valuable information
Glad it was helpful!
OThanks Thanks yHi toll klnn
This has never been explained to me so clearly before. Thanks for that - greetings to Australia!
Happy to help!
Once again, you show how to explain things clearly. Brilliant communicator, Nick.
I shot Kodachrome slides for half my career. No Lightroom, no Photoshop. I'll shoot Jpgs because I'm NOT going to spend my life staring at a computer monitor mucking around with a massive raw file.
By far the most succinct explanation of this topic anywhere on you tube or anywhere for that matter,too right mate.
This is the best explanation and illustration I have come across about Raw and JPEG exposures.
Glad you found it useful.
Thank you!
Have read, watched and understood tonnes about this realm, but your explanation was probably the finest, most concise and clearest!
Thanks for the kind words, we aim to please!
A stunningly clear and succinct explanation as well as outstanding teaching. It would be difficult to describe how glad I am that I found your channel and you have caused my digital photography knowledge to take a leap. I am in the USA and so buying from you was not practical, but I now have my (first) Leica because of your channel.
Wow, thank you!
Great piece. Concise, clear, well-documented, very educational. Everyone with doubts about the relationships between JPG/RAW and the quality of their images should watch it. Great tip about sharpening too. Thank you very much, excellent resource.
Glad it was helpful!
Great explanation Nick. I think it's also important to point out that JPEGs can be useful for people who don't necessarily want to spend lots of time post-processing their images afterwards. I've been shooting JPEGs recently with the Q2 and have been very happy with the out of camera results. I do still love RAW though, especially for landscapes!
many thanks Nick
Excellent tutorial! Thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thanks. Now I understand how it works.....excellent!!!!!
many thanks for clear and simple explanation. perfect
You are welcome!
Thank you! That's spot on comparison, I will only shoot in RAW from this point
Very useful information. Thanks.
Glad it was helpful!
Fantastic!
Many thanks!
Great explanations
Glad it was helpful!
Very well presented, as always Nick. I'd like to add some additional points for your viewers. Allowing your Leica camera to process images on-the-fly does offer some benefits. Shooting DNG+JPG gives you access to film profiles, like Monochrome HC, whilst retaining a digital negative for further post-processing. With an EVF camera, shooting with a B&W profile also allows one to better previsualize the finished image. Additionally, shooting DNG+Small JPG provides a finished image which is quickly downloadable thru the Leica Fotos app and ready to share.
I would say shooting RAW is like using Color Negative film. JPEG is more like shooting Color Transparency (slide) film. If you NAIL your exposure and white balance, the latter provides a pretty nice finished file. Certainly for professional use, RAW is the way to go. But today's JPEG files are surprisingly malleable, especially when edited with a non-destructive software, like On1 Photo RAW.
Kinda... there were times when I would happily and reasonably choose a Kodachrome or Velvia over color negs; not the case with JPG/RAW. But in terms of latitude of exposure I would agree with you. The difference is that the JPG file is derived from the RAW one; this relationship does not exist with film.
WONDERFULLY ...
I have taken to shooting B&W Jpegs and RAW files on my Dlux7.. This is working well as I get the BW viewfinder, unless I accidentally click the full auto button. I have been amazed at what is in the RAW file. Thanks!
Yes, Raw + Jpegs is great if you set the camera to B+W - kinda like having your cake and eating it.
Nice content very informative channel. keep it up. big thumbs up
Thanks for the visit
Well explained !! Thank you! Laszlo Montreal
Glad it was helpful!
Muchas gracias por la demostración, es claramente una gran diferencia en la posibilidad de editar una sobre otra. Además es bueno saber también el tipo de fotografía en que conviene usar jpeg sobre raw. Yo tomo fotos de paisajes y retratos por lo que siempre prefiero raw.
Eres muy bienvenida.
thanks
You're welcome!
Very helpful thanks. A mention of the ability to change the white balance would have fitted in well.
... a little more complex than that. Choosing a white balance is pointless in RAW because the information recorded is RAW (almost) without bias, it is not the case in JPG format. Remember, the white balance appearance can still be modified in processing a JPG file, but these modifications are not as smooth, extended and easy as with processing a RAW file.
Glad it was helpful! You are correct about white balance - it's very hard to fully correct extreme WB errors in Jpegs.
Another great video Nick. I find the RAW JPEG discrepancy largest on prints. JPEG prints look flat, even on small print sizes.
That has more to do with your settings than the JPG format itself.
That is true. Out of camera Jpegs and raw files can look identical if prepared correctly. Raw files just have a wider range of potential for post processing.
Always better than expected... Thanks Nick.
So, if I understand correctly, a JPEG with a CL or with a S3 has the same dynamic range of 8 stops ?
Not exactly - a jpeg can only describe 256 different values or levels of brightness (8 bits) between Black (0) and White (255), but different cameras can capture 10 - 14 stops of DR. When the jpeg is saved in camera, the full DR of the scene needs to be 'tone mapped' to take the wider range and squash it into the 8 bits of the jpeg. This is part of the secret sauce that camera manufacturers apply in their firmware and affects the look of the resulting jpeg. If you shoot raw you capture the full DR of the camera's sensor but you need to do the tone mapping yourself - otherwise known as raw processing. Output will usually also be an 8 bit jpeg, ready for web or print.
QUESTION: I shoot with Leica Q2 and I’m wondering, if I shoot RAW and develop with Luminar, will the resulting jpg keep the “Leica feel” (I really like the way the camera renders colors)…or will it be just like any other camera?…
Because I think that the color profiles and rendering from the camera are only there, If shooting jpg. Thanks
The specific color profiles and rendering from the camera are only applied in-camera when shooting jpg. That said, all the other characteristics of the Leica sensors and Leica lenses are present in the raw files and so, yes, you still get the "Leica Look".
Pongan por favor subtítulos en español
PS: (see 5'28"): don't 14 bits= 16,384 and 15 bits = 32,768 ? Just splitting hair here which does not take anything away from what I said previously. Great tutorial.
Yeah, you're right. Should have said 32 thousand for Leica files. Pity I can't edit the video to correct it!
i WISH YOU COMPARED THE dng\jpeg ON A lEICA m10 mONOCHROM
The exact same principles will apply.
@@LeicaCameraAustralia Thank you. When I still used my M9 Mono I spoke with Thorsten and we decided JPEG was a better option. On the M10 Mono he thinks DNG is better. Do you think it has to do with the sensor?
DNG capture will always be a better option IF you do much post processing. But if you like the results straight out of camera then maybe Jpegs are more appropriate for you. I would always turn down the sharpening though...
The JPEG looks a bit like push-processed film. I kinda like it! :)
It does indeed. You can make the raw look like the jpeg - but not the other way around!
So the moral of the whole story is that "do not forget to set the camera to the correct setting based on the situation you are taking pictures in". Problem solved, and continue with JPG.
That's true to a point, but assumes there is one single correct exposure for all parts of the shot. If you need to do selective exposure adjustments later (dodging and burning) then raw is your best friend.
Why, oh why, when you buy a good camera, do you shoot in JPEG. That's like buying a car and always driving in low gear
There are lots of good reasons to shoot Jpegs. Or DNG plus Jpeg. This video just seeks to explain what you're are missing with Jpegs but nothing is stopping anyone using Jpegs if it suits them. Newspaper photographers often shoot Jpegs, for example.
No, it's like buying an M3 and using slide film.