Raw question

[brewercm]

Ive done a little processing of raw to jpg but have a question. The after processing jpg file ends up much smaller coming from raw than taking a fine/large jpg out of my D90.
Granted I haven't used anything other than ViewNX and Irfanview. I see the file size of the NEF is much larger but the conversion is actually smaller.
I've done a search and looked through a ton of stuff but just not understanding what is happening.

Any helpful input would be great and sorry didn't look through every raw thread but full time work and full time school limits my time. Reason I'm asking is I'm starting to get a lot of request for what I'd consider semi pro shoots. Mostly people who've seen some of my work along side some they've paid a lot of money for and want to take that step in getting better all together myself.

Thanks,
Cliff

[Randy Chambers]

If you are saying that the FILE SIZE is smaller that is to be expected, there is not near as much data in a .jpg as there is a RAW file.

If you are saying the the physical IMAGE SIZE is smaller, check your export settings. you should be able to select the size to export.

[ggeen]

Also, when you do the Save As and select JPG, how much compression are you using? CaptureNX2 (CNX2) has a few presets, "Excellent Quality" is 100% or no compression. "Very Good" is 80% (or 20% compression), "Good" is 60% (or 40% compression), etc.

The amount of compression will affect the final FILE SIZE as in KBs and final image quality.

[johnastovall]

The late Bruce Fraser on RAW processing.

[PDF] Understanding Digital Raw Capture

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
WHITEPAPER. Understanding Digital Raw. Capture. By now, you've probably heard some talk about digital raw capture, but finding a coher- ...
www.adobe.com/.../digitalimag/.../understanding_digitalrawcapture.pdf - Taiwan

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by brewercm

Ive done a little processing of raw to jpg but have a question. The after processing jpg file ends up much smaller coming from raw than taking a fine/large jpg out of my D90.
Granted I haven't used anything other than ViewNX and Irfanview. I see the file size of the NEF is much larger but the conversion is actually smaller.
I've done a search and looked through a ton of stuff but just not understanding what is happening.

Any helpful input would be great and sorry didn't look through every raw thread but full time work and full time school limits my time. Reason I'm asking is I'm starting to get a lot of request for what I'd consider semi pro shoots. Mostly people who've seen some of my work along side some they've paid a lot of money for and want to take that step in getting better all together myself.

Thanks,
Cliff

The only reason for converting to jpeg is for posting to the net. A Jpeg is throwing away half your data and plays hell with the gamut when printing. At least convert raw images to tiiff for saving and printing.

[brewercm]

Thanks for that link I'll take a look around in it.

I realize the jpg file size will be quite a bit smaller, but in these cases the actuall image size is much smaller. After post processing I'm using the highest quality on the conversion, but when I'd look at the output image rather than being the size I'd expect, the image is smaller and very grainy. Almost looks like it was taken at a very high ISO rating with tons of noise when it was taken at 100.

I'll try the TIFF file tonight and see what the output looks like. It may also be the fact that I'm using not very good software to do the post processing.

Thanks for the input.

[srwatters]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

The only reason for converting to jpeg is for posting to the net. A Jpeg is throwing away half your data and plays hell with the gamut when printing. At least convert raw images to tiiff for saving and printing.

If you insert a 'can' into your statement I will concur. I wouldn't make such a blanket statement. jpg is an 8 bit format and some implementations can get a bit over zealous with compression. I've done many experiments asking people to do A/B comparisons between tiff and high quality jpg files as seen on a quality LCD display. Using jpg quality 8-10, I've yet to find someone who can really tell the difference on a consistent basis.

Just adding my $.02.

PS - Confession - I save 16 bit ProPhoto RGB master files for all my edited images just to be safe.

[revjvegas]

Before you save the file, are you doing any sort of cropping and/or resizing of the photo while you're editing it in ViewNX?

[brewercm]

Originally Posted by revjvegas

Before you save the file, are you doing any sort of cropping and/or resizing of the photo while you're editing it in ViewNX?

None, just some color, sharpening, and EV compensation adjustments. That's what kind of has me baffled about it, and the reason I was wondering if it has something to do with either of those two programs.

Is there another decent shareware program out there that does a decent job. I realize I'll need to pay for a good quality editor down the road but just wanted to play for right now and learn a little more about the conversion.

[revjvegas]

Irfanview I'm not familiar with and I've recently stopped using ViewNX and moved to CaptureNX, but still ... ViewNX shouldn't be jacking the file that much. If you're saving as a JPG at 100%-excellent quality, yes the file size will be smaller than what you started with in RAW, but the picture itself should not be noticeably degraded.

Just to see how much data is shaved off, I did a test with one of my own, and from RAW (8924KB) saved to JPG HQ (5918KB).

So I have to wonder if what might be giving you the issue is that Irfanview program.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by brewercm

None, just some color, sharpening, and EV compensation adjustments. That's what kind of has me baffled about it, and the reason I was wondering if it has something to do with either of those two programs.

Is there another decent shareware program out there that does a decent job. I realize I'll need to pay for a good quality editor down the road but just wanted to play for right now and learn a little more about the conversion.

If you want to learn about raw conversion, get a copy of "Real World Camera Raw with Adobe Photoshop CS4" by Fraser and Schewe. It will show you why you need a quality program for raw conversions. The first three chapters focus on shooting for raw in general.

You might want to check out some of these links, after all Fraser wrote Camera RAW.

[brewercm]

Stovall,
Thanks for all the sites and things to look into, I looked through the one from earlier and some good info.

John,
I'm not sure either, but the JPG file is much larger when taking fine large jpg than when I convert. Not to mention the degredation in the image itself. I'll play more this weekend with it also once I have more time. Thanks for all the responses.

[DoublyDan]

Does the D90 save different RAW file sizes?


I know that my 7D will allow me to save S, M, and L RAW files... Perhaps you are converting from a smaller RAW while the JPEG in camera is set to a larger format...

Just a guess and hopefully you can check it off the list of possibilities.

[revjvegas]

Originally Posted by DoublyDan

Does the D90 save different RAW file sizes?


I know that my 7D will allow me to save S, M, and L RAW files... Perhaps you are converting from a smaller RAW while the JPEG in camera is set to a larger format...

Just a guess and hopefully you can check it off the list of possibilities.

Nope.
RAW on the D90 is full size. You can also select to shoot RAW + JPEG and choose if you want Fine, Normal, or Basic on that JPEG, but RAW is always the full 12-bit data capture.

[David Whatley]

You need to go into the "options" section of the program you are using to convert and make sure it is set to "zero" compression, or "best quality"
If you do a file "save as" a lot of times the next window has an "options" selection there.