Save as JPEG...??!??!

[Ben]

I've always saved all my photos in JPEG format (for the web) after editting my RAW images, and then went back into PS and had to a bit of color correction because I lost a lot of image quality. The images NEVER turn out exactly the same from what I took.

Is it possible to save a RAW file as a JPG without losing the quality? Am I asking too much?



thanks ahead of time.

[LoungeLizard]

you're asking too much...but look at how you're saving your JPEG and where you're looking at it. Are you saving in the maximum resolution (move the slider to "12"). Are you saving as 300dpi - or reducing it to 72 dpi (makes a bit of difference if you enlarge it).

[DEMDeepEllumMusic]

JPEG is inherently (sp) a smaller file since it is a compression of the RAW file. There are many RAW file compression programs on the internet and you may want to try to see if there is one that has an output that is closer to what you are looking for.
http://www.pixmantec.com/ offers a free basic program.
There are others out there just do a google search on RAW files to JPEG or similar wording.

I grimace when people say that they automatically JPEG their shots in the camera and toss their RAW files because it saves space on their storage media.

[Ben]

Yes maximum resolution. And ya i'm checkin the DPI.

I've been doing save for web and not the simple save as. Save as gives me the right results. Save for web doesn't.

I'm getting the right results now.

Question 2: What is the logic behind losing color quality with save for web?

[Ben]

Originally Posted by DEMDeepEllumMusic

JPEG is inherently (sp) a smaller file since it is a compression of the RAW file. There are many RAW file compression programs on the internet and you may want to try to see if there is one that has an output that is closer to what you are looking for.
http://www.pixmantec.com/ offers a free basic program.
There are others out there just do a google search on RAW files to JPEG or similar wording.

I grimace when people say that they automatically JPEG their shots in the camera and toss their RAW files because it saves space on their storage media.

Thanks! I'll look into it.

Ya...im a pack rat and I can't delete anything. I'd rather buy another hard drive than delete my RAW files. I even keep my bad pictures too.

[gpbusa316]

If you are going to edit your photos with PS, then it may help to save them as tiff files during your RAW conversion. Then open the tiff file in PS, do any corrections/resizing, and save to jpg using PS.

If you convert directly to jpg from RAW (with your RAW converter), you'll lose a little bit by reopening it in PS and then resaving to jpg again.

If you could post your current workflow, the RAW converter that you use, what camera you have and maybe some examples of your pics, then we could probably offer some more specific advise.

[brad]

Originally Posted by Ben

Question 2: What is the logic behind losing color quality with save for web?

Two words: Color Space

Web browsers typically only understand the sRGB color space, which means if the conversion is done automagically, you may get undesirable results in the color. (I'm no color space expert, so my explanation may be overly simplistic, but you get the idea.)

For what its worth, when I'm posting for the web, I convert to sRGB in camera (in the RAW file).. then I convert the raw file and just do a simple "save as jpg" .. and post those.. the results are sufficient for web use without having to do a "save for web" type save.

[LoungeLizard]

Save for web also automatically (I believe) drops it down to 72 dpi - which is the "standard".

[srwatters]

Originally Posted by LoungeLizard

Save for web also automatically (I believe) drops it down to 72 dpi - which is the "standard".

Remember that DPI only matters when you resample and use the ratio in inches. The real determining factor is the height x width pixel dimensions. Most computer screens are about 72 dpi, so if you measure your display in inches, then calculate the DPI at that resolution (1280x1024 or 1024x768, etc.) then you can relate those two numbers.

Make sense?

[Ben]

Originally Posted by srwatters

Remember that DPI only matters when you resample and use the ratio in inches. The real determining factor is the height x width pixel dimensions. Most computer screens are about 72 dpi, so if you measure your display in inches, then calculate the DPI at that resolution (1280x1024 or 1024x768, etc.) then you can relate those two numbers.

Make sense?

Ya. I understand DPI and pixels and such, but didn't want to say anything...

[Ben]

Originally Posted by brad

Two words: Color Space

Web browsers typically only understand the sRGB color space, which means if the conversion is done automagically, you may get undesirable results in the color. (I'm no color space expert, so my explanation may be overly simplistic, but you get the idea.)

For what its worth, when I'm posting for the web, I convert to sRGB in camera (in the RAW file).. then I convert the raw file and just do a simple "save as jpg" .. and post those.. the results are sufficient for web use without having to do a "save for web" type save.

Ok..the color space thing makes a lot of sense. I read into that before for getting prints of my pictures...but didn't make the connection with the web stuff. Thanks!

Oh and i'll get some pictures of my stuff to show you what i'm talking about.

[bear1962]

Photoshop default color setting is sRGB IEC61966-2.1 which is not a good color space for photos.

Open PS.
Hit "shift + Control + K"
This will bring up "Color Settings"
Click on the "RGB" drop menu and select "Adobe RGB 1998"

This will make a big difference in your colors when saving work in PS.

Tony

[LoungeLizard]

Originally Posted by srwatters

Remember that DPI only matters when you resample and use the ratio in inches. The real determining factor is the height x width pixel dimensions. Most computer screens are about 72 dpi, so if you measure your display in inches, then calculate the DPI at that resolution (1280x1024 or 1024x768, etc.) then you can relate those two numbers.

Make sense?

Makes sense....but if you're saving (or sizing is a better term) to a specific dimension in inches instead of pixels and use 72 instead of 300 (for example) your results will be dramatically different. That's what I was trying to say.

A photo sized to 8x10 at 72 dpi will lose quality (be of less quality) than one sized to 8x10 at 300 dpi - again, as you stated because of the pixel count.

[merock]

Adoe RGB has a wider gammut of color. You should be shooting in this and your color space should be the same. At least thats what works for me to keep conistancy. You can also assign profiles to your images. Image>Mode>Assign profiles. Keeping your working space and your profiles the same will help you achieve consistant colors. I spent over a week of trial and error to get everything consitant from screen to web to print. Hate this stuff. Good luck.

[eurotrash]

i didnt read all the above posts cause im just lazy oh well. do this though. double click your color pallete and look at the box at the bottom, it should be a selectable box that says "websafe colors only" or something like that. when it is selected THOSE are the only colors that browsers will see, when the box is unselected you will see the full gamut of colors. thats the easiest way to understand. this is why when you are choosing a background color in layout to merge with html you have to make sure to pick a websafe color otherwise youll see the color breaks when the web cant match the color 100% and reverts to a noob color.