Cant get raw to look as good as Jpeg!

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by MexicoMik, Apr 21, 2013.

  1. MexicoMik

    MexicoMik Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 19, 2012
    I've had an OMD for over a year now and I shoot in raw+LF jpeg. I've traveled all over with it and frankly, using Apple aperture, I have never figured out how to get Raw to look as good as the in-camera LF Jpegs. So frankly I keep wondering why I am shooting in Raw at all.

    Help me out here...are there some "standard" Aperture settings that will actually produce Raw images that look better than Jpegs?
  2. spatulaboy

    spatulaboy I'm not really here Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    North Carolina
    It would help to be more specific. What is it about the Jpegs that you like? What aspects of the RAW files are you unhappy with/or are having trouble with?

    Ultimately it all comes down to this: Photography should not be an exercise in frustration, it should be fun and rewarding. It's your camera, your pictures. If you are happier with the JPEG output, then shoot JPEG! Don't shoot RAW just because everyone else does it.
  3. pake

    pake Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Oct 14, 2010
    I had similar problems when I started working with RAWs. Then I read Scott Kelby's Lightroom book and it changed my life. :)

    You gotta know what you're doing (with RAW). Otherwise it's better to stick with OOC-JPEGs. So, I'd suggest studying the use Apple Aperture in order to get the results you'd like. I'm pretty sure there are books for that software too...
  4. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    I was also never satisfied with the effort required just to get "near" the OM-D ooc-jpgs. Every time I tried to improve things, I made it worse.
    Then, by chance, I experimented with different raw processors. And settled on Raw Therapee. I feel much more in control now. I can quickly equal those ooc-jpgs. And improve on them in those tricky cases.
    I tried a bunch of different raw processors. I found some easy and some tricky. I'm not saying the tricky ones are necessarily bad. I just felt I was never making progress. They just did not suit me. Someone else might have the opposite experience with those programs. It may be to do with the defaults for particular cameras too.
  5. gugarci

    gugarci Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 8, 2012
    Lyndhurst, NJ
    I play around a lot with Raw Therapee and it's a great free raw editor. But you can make raw file look great with the other raw editors if you know how to use them properly. Also there is no "standard" Aperture settings that will actually produce Raw images that look better than Jpegs"

    Aperture is a very powerful editor. You just need to learn how to use it properly. Learn Aperture. You already have the proper tool.
  6. spinyman

    spinyman Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 19, 2010
    San Diego
    I mainly shoot in jpeg.Nothing wrong with that.
  7. KVG

    KVG Banned User

    May 10, 2011
    yyc(Calgary, AB)
    Kelly Gibbons
    I shoot jpeg. All the cool kids are doing it.
  8. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
  9. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    I was at 999 posts- so this post is just for me to go over 1000! :tongue:
  10. Robstar1963

    Robstar1963 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 10, 2011
    Isle of Wight England UK
    Robert (Rob)
    I only shoot jpegs - that is one reason why I bought an OM-D recently - it s the best M4/3 camera available for jpeg output
    I simply dont have the time to devote to learning RAW and processing other than very basic jpeg processing
    If simplicity is what you need why over complicate things ?
  11. gugarci

    gugarci Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 8, 2012
    Lyndhurst, NJ
    With a program like LR raw processing your raw files is just as quick and produces better results. Now if you never edit your JPG's then don't bother with raw.
  12. woody112704

    woody112704 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 13, 2012
  13. M4/3

    M4/3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 24, 2011
    Only 2 months ago I was a diehard jpeg shooter. Then I spent a few hours toying around with the free Olympus Viewer 3.0 Software Download | OLYMPUS Viewer 3 | OLYMPUS IMAGING. I soon found that even though the out of the camera jpegs usually looked good, they looked even richer and resolved more detailed when I shot RAW and resized and converted them to jpeg using Olympus Viewer 3.0.
  14. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman Subscribing Member

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    I have an OMD, and I use only Aperture... sadly I only shoot RAW...havent shot jpeg in the last 5 years... can you maybe give an indication of what you aren't able to achieve in RAW that you see in the JPEG?... is it colors... sharpness.. contrast?

    maybe then I could give you some pointers?...maybe offer up a raw and a jpeg file of a typical photo on drop box and let me see if I can help.

  15. SkiHound

    SkiHound Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 28, 2012
    Kevin is using Aperture so I may be completely off base here. A few years ago I downloaded trial versions of Aperture 3 and LR3. I liked the Aperture interface but I could not get it to match OOC jpegs from my E620. That might be specific to that camera? I just thought LR3 did a vastly better job with the E620 raw files. Haven't used Aperture with my E-M5 raw files. I usually shoot raw and jpeg but I only use the jpegs for quick use like viewing images on an iPad, or uploading casual images to social networking sites.
  16. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    I'll echo what others have said:

    First and foremost, if you're that happy with the JPEG output... just shoot JPEG! Frankly I think if you needed the extra editing headroom of RAW photos in your workflow, you'd already know what you're missing. Try pushing exposure a couple stops in a RAW file versus a JPEG, or heavily adjusting highlights/shadows, or sharpening and you'll be hard pressed NOT to see the difference between the two.

    Secondly, if you can post an example or two and specifics of what you're feeling is missing, that'll go a long way toward making it easier to make suggestions. With the exception of some of the Fuji JPEG output, I've always been happier with the results I could get from RAW workflow - and I'm certainly not a post-processing guru.

    Another good suggestion would be to check out the Post-Processing challenge threads here on the forum. You can see the huge variation of what can be done with RAW files in post through dozens of different people's processing workflows & vision.
  17. MexicoMik

    MexicoMik Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 19, 2012
    "is it colors... sharpness.. contrast?"

    Primarily sharpness. color/contrast is easy to adjust to what I want. But I cannot manage to get a raw photo to look as sharp as the Jpeg - at least not with any relatively easy setting adjustments. I'm sure that if I wanted to fool with them extensively I could but I am not interested in working on an image for extended periods.

    Interestingly, when I shot Nikons (my last was my D7000) I could easily and quickly better the Jpegs using Raw and I shot/used the raw images most of the time. With the OMD I shoot both and end up using the Jpegs and save the Raws onto another drive "just in case."
  18. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman Subscribing Member

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    OK.. just took a bit of time this morning to shoot a RAW plus JPEG. Shot the JPg with sharpness set at +2

    Taking them into Aperture - the default RAW was a little softer looking, but adding a Edge Sharpen Adjustment and dropping the Edges and Falloff sliders down a bit - more on Falloff, got me something that to my eyes looked pretty much equal to the JPeg.

    Now my caveat is

    a) My eyes are getting older

    b) I am generally not a pixel peeper at this level

    but maybe this will help

  19. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    You'll need to be more agressive with the sharpening to equal the sharpness of the out of camera JPGs. If you want some specific tips/hints, upload a RAW file and the JPG somewhere so we can have a crack at it. I can throw it through 'standard' processing via DxO or LR...
  20. Stephen

    Stephen Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 2, 2013
    Your fighting very good jpeg processing in camera these days to do better, yes, totally possible to get "better", if a very specific result is required, but often shots are far more general in purpose, and the Jpeg can be tweaked anyway. It all depends on what the result will be used for, pro publishing etc, or simply display on a screen, or home printing. This is not so much different to film use, not everybody wanted to spend hours in the darkroom.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.