# RAW/JPEG/Photoshop



## minimadgriff (Jul 8, 2007)

Morning all, 

the last lot of pictures I have taken I thought I would take them in RAW format. This is all fine but when I come to convert to JPEG they seem to loose quite abit of sharpeness and clarity. 

Is there anyway round this? As I would rather not loose any quality. 

Thanks 

Ben

p.s does anyone know of a RAW file viewer and I can't look out the photos with out going into an editing programme like Photoshop or Sony's image data convertor.


----------



## macc70 (Oct 20, 2007)

Try converting into TIFF file format. Lossless - compression with no loss of information but the pic does get a little smaller
I always backup all files before messing about with them:wall:


----------



## minimadgriff (Jul 8, 2007)

macc70 said:


> Try converting into TIFF file format. Lossless - compression with no loss of information but the pic does get a little smaller
> I always backup all files before messing about with them:wall:


My RAW files automatically open in the Sony Editor, then when I send them to Photoshop it autmoatically changed them to a TIFF. The only problem with this is wont they be too big to up load to photo bucket?


----------



## Shiny (Apr 23, 2007)

Did you not get any software with your Camera that includes a RAW image viewer/converter?

I did with my Canon.


----------



## minimadgriff (Jul 8, 2007)

Shiny said:


> Did you not get any software with your Camera that includes a RAW image viewer/converter?
> 
> I did with my Canon.


I did get a disc with it but im on my works computer not my laptop and I havn't dabbled with RAW files on the laptop that has the software on it. So I could have :lol:


----------



## bretti_kivi (Apr 22, 2008)

..... if you have Photochop, go get "Adobe Camera Raw". 

If you're a cheapskate like me, go get GIMP and then UFRaw.

Which OS?

Bret


----------



## Dornrade (Sep 26, 2009)

Adobe Camera Raw. Seconded. I've not heard of converting RAW and losing quality. I love RAW and have shot it for years. I use Adobe Camera Raw in potatochop always.
Can't recommend anything else


----------



## bretti_kivi (Apr 22, 2008)

Quick overview of some of the power of RAW:

A shot from February 2009:










Note that if "denoise" is selected, it will mush my picture!

this is "auto" corrected and with the curve returned to standard.










So, if I start from there... well, it's too pale, and I'm not convinced on the Whitebalance (easy way to check - people's skin or sky.. it should look "normal"). 
So, WB set to "camera WB", then curve applied... 









I have a couple of other curves, too, you can see what they do:










and










Note that moving the bottom and top of the curve will also have an effect...










.. this is the start. HtH. Questions?

Bret


----------



## JasonRS (Aug 8, 2006)

minimadgriff said:


> This is all fine but when I come to convert to JPEG they seem to loose quite abit of sharpeness and clarity.
> .


That's because RAW files have no sharpening etc applied, and you have to do this before converting to jpg.


----------



## bretti_kivi (Apr 22, 2008)

Disagree on that, but there are so many tricks to sharpen it's difficult to understand where to start. 

If a RAW-processed JPG is soft, your processing workflow is wrong somewhere, simples. The question is where. 

Bret


----------



## parish (Jun 29, 2006)

minimadgriff said:


> p.s does anyone know of a RAW file viewer and I can't look out the photos with out going into an editing programme like Photoshop or Sony's image data convertor.


Google's Picasa supports lots of RAW formats. including Sony :thumb:

http://picasa.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en-uk&answer=15625


----------



## minimadgriff (Jul 8, 2007)

hmmm I think i need to stick to taking them in fine mode or learn how to use photoshop! I look at Photoshop CS and the one I got with my A350 and im just at a loss.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

http://www.photography-forum.org

There is a whole section on Photoshop and a lot of very talented people (i'm not one of them). It's also a very friendly forum in a similar vein to DW.


----------



## buckas (Jun 13, 2008)

If you're just converting straight to JPEG level 12 with no cropping or other processing, it will look 'soft' unless you apply some form of sharpening to it... and there are so many variables with this that it can give you a proper headache...

Providing you do the 'right' amount of processing then there's no reason your images shouldn't look as sharp as the preview image you saw when looking at your RAW images.

Getting the 'right' amount of processing is a battle in itself...but once learned it comes naturally...

I (and a lot of other people) prefer to use some other form of processing software - I use DPP to do the RAW conversion as a 16 bit TIFF...then Adobe Lightroom 2 to handle the processing etc...

The 'Workflow' you end up with will define your image style and should be looked into in some detail, given that the various software packages aren't cheap ()...


----------



## parish (Jun 29, 2006)

minimadgriff said:


> hmmm I think i need to stick to taking them in fine mode or learn how to use photoshop! I look at Photoshop CS and the one I got with my A350 and im just at a loss.


You'd be better off getting used to using RAW as the benefits out-weigh the slightly more involved process.

Even using 'Fine' some info is lost from the image as JPEG is a lossy format which probably isn't an issue most of the time but say for example you need to heavily edit, e.g. correct under-exposure and/or heavy colour-cast due to the White Balance being wrong, then you'll get much better results using RAW than JPEG as none of the info has been lost from the image.

You don't *need* anything as complex as PS for handling RAW images. As mentioned, the Sony s/w and Picasa, and no doubt numerous other packages handle them fine. If Sony have a Codec available you may even be able to use the Windows Picture and Fax Viewer.

The Sony s/w is probably your best bet for general use. If it's anything like Canon's then it does a pretty good job of processing RAW with its default settings. TBH, you only need to convert to JPEG/PNG/TIFF etc. for posting on the web/e-mailing/printing.


----------



## bretti_kivi (Apr 22, 2008)

what he said - RAW is worth it. 

If you really honestly think you'll get the best pics directly from the cam, fair play. It's not true 

Learning how the curves work is worth it. It takes time, effort and practice (i'm still arguing with a very complex sharpening algorithm involving decomposition, edge detection and sharpening masks - I've done it maybe ten times and still get it wrong) - but the results are most definitely worth it.

Bret


----------

