This RAW image vs JPEG

[vinski]

Hi noticing a significant difference in my un edited RAW images and Jpegs. I guess what I want to know is why are htese JPEGS so much more contrasty? DOes the flatter RAW image improve the editing potential? WHy is there such a big difference?

Apparently I cannot post attachments here or I would show you what I'm talking about.

 

[Arch]

Put RAW in the search function.... question answered.

 

[Garbz]

Every RAW viewer you open the pictures in will render the picture quite different. The JPEG will always render the same. The RAW leaves things to your own interpretation.

 

[Dwig]

Hi noticing a significant difference in my un edited RAW images and Jpegs...

What do you mean by "unedited".

You must understand that you've never seen an unconverted RAW image. Everytime you "view" a RAW image you are actually viewing a bitmap image converted from the RAW data. As has altready been said, every RAW converter has its own default settings.

The JPEG produced in the camera was created from an original RAW image using the camera's software with the settings made in the camera for contrast, saturation, ... . When you view a RAW on your computer you are seeing the result of a different RAW converter using different default settings, at least in most cases. You shouldn't expect the two to match.

In a few cases, a camera manufacturer will offer a computer based RAW converter that is tuned to match the in-camera software and to read the "notes" (EXIF and proprietary header data) in a RAW file so that it can use the camera's settings as its initial default. On such software package is Nikon's Capture NX.

 

[KmH]

Hi noticing a significant difference in my un edited RAW images and Jpegs. I guess what I want to know is why are htese JPEGS so much more contrasty? DOes the flatter RAW image improve the editing potential? WHy is there such a big difference?

Yes, RAW significantly improves the editing potential.

RAW is like a film negative.
The image and histogram shown on the back LCD are not the Raw image, but a bitmapped, post processed, rendering so you can verify composition/framing.
RAW is at least a 12-bit depth image (4096 tonal gradations per color channel) and some are 14-bit depth (16,384 tonal gradations per color channel).
Raw, once converted, is a 16-bit depth image but at least 4 of those bits (16 minus 12) do not contain additional tonal gradation information.

JPEG is only an 8-bit depth image (256 tonal gradations per color channel).
Plus in the conversion to JPEG the pixels are constrained into 8 pixel by 8 pixel blocks (64 pixels in each block).
JPEGs have little headroom for editing and is considered a print format, not intended for additional editing.
JPEG is like a print, post processed and made from a negative.

 

[vinski]

WHo needs to go to photography school when you have forums like this!!!