Terrible RAW JPG conversion.
Terrible RAW JPG conversion.
Author
Discussion

raf_gti

Original Poster:

4,253 posts

235 months

Tuesday 28th December 2010
quotequote all
After an almost two year break from clicking my shutter I'm finally getting back into photography.

However, I seem to be having a bit of a nightmare with my 'workflow'.

I'm using a Canon 400d in RAW mode and transferring via Zoombrowser, I can get the images looking just right (to me) within the RAW processor but when converting to JPG they lose a load of clarity and colour separation. I've also tried it via PS and it's not that much better TBH.

Below is an example, hopefully it won't lose even more detail via the uploader.




raf_gti

Original Poster:

4,253 posts

235 months

Tuesday 28th December 2010
quotequote all
Hmmmm.

Interesting.

Having now seen those in the thread they don't look all that bad actually!

Yet when I've taken a picture of a very red Fiat 500 it comes out looking flat and brown :S

Arse.

SamHH

5,078 posts

245 months

Tuesday 28th December 2010
quotequote all
If, as in the screenshot, you are using Adobe RGB colour space, that would account for unexpected colours. Use sRGB.

Re. the loss of clarity, what compression setting are you using for the JPEGs?

Yellabelly

2,258 posts

282 months

Tuesday 28th December 2010
quotequote all
On my monitor they are nearly identical,have you had your monitor calibrated?

I notice that you are using Adobe RGB as the colour space, trying changing to sRGB in camera and on your pp software. Adobe RGB is too wide ranging whereas sRGB yields better results on monitors as they cannot reproduce the full Adobe RGB range whereas sRGB being a narrower range allows them to represent all the colours in the range.

HTH

YB


raf_gti

Original Poster:

4,253 posts

235 months

Tuesday 28th December 2010
quotequote all
Thanks.

Will change from Adobe to 's'. I've had that setting on since I started playing with PS.

My monitor isn't calibrated, that's another concern I don't need in my life!

Having viewed the JPG in various different viewers it would appear that the default XP picture viewer is less than ideal for displaying them.

Will have to have a further play to find the best combo of quality and ease of use.

SamHH

5,078 posts

245 months

Tuesday 28th December 2010
quotequote all
Ah yes, if you're viewing a large image compressed to a lower resolution, (e.g. a 3000x2000 pixel photo on a 1024x768 pixel screen), it will lack clarity in some programs. You need to view the photo at 1:1 (so one pixel in the image is displayed by one pixel on the screen).

Do also check what compression is being applied when you create a JPEG from the RAW. For most purposes, you should use minimum compression.