Oly, Jpeg, Lightroom and me.

Alf

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
862
Location
Northeastern Tuscany
So there I was, happily browsing which pics to process, importing into lightroom, tweaking, moving dials here and there. That is what jpeg+RAWs are for.

But. Big But.











Ok, LR3 gives me some latitude, and I love tweaking pics until late into the night. But but but.
Long live the glorious Oly Jpeg Engine.
(oh, and OOC jpegs are the second of each couple)
 

shoturtle

 
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
823
I have not yet been really able to produce a jpeg better then the oly with a raw shot, might have some different color cast with curves. But as a jpeg goes. The oly is hard as hell to out edit. But you can change that color cast on the oly jpegs easily in pp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alf

kevinparis

Cantankerous Scotsman
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
3,911
Location
Gent, Belgium
in every case your raw processed ( the first one) image looks better to me

Also if you have the RAW you can always go back later when your skills and or your software get better


but thats just me


K
 

Hyubie

Unique like everyone else
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
1,393
Location
Massachusetts
Real Name
Herbert
The first two I prefer the Oly colors. The others I prefer your processing. That's what I try to do too - shoot in RAW+JPG. Then I try if I can process better. If not, I go with the Oly JPEG. And I'm finding out it's hard to compete with. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alf

pjohngren

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
560
The fact that they are competing with each other, so that different people prefer one over the other, says to me that jpeg is clearly able to produce images equal to RAW - they may be different, but they can be just as good. Can you fine tune the Oly jpeg like you can the Panny?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alf

DHart

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
3,525
Location
Scottsdale, Arizona
Real Name
Don
The fact that they are competing with each other, so that different people prefer one over the other, says to me that jpeg is clearly able to produce images equal to RAW - they may be different, but they can be just as good.
Pete, this assertion is wrong. You may prefer the OOC color rendition to whatever you are able to produce yourself in post, but that doesn't confirm that in-camera JPG capture is superior to RAW capture. There is much more to image quality than just color rendition. And as you develop skills in image editing, with the tools available in Lightroom/Aperture, the sky is the limit in development potential. You are only fooling yourself in declaring that JPG capture is equal to RAW capture. Looking at the above comparison of RAW & JPG captures tells you NOTHING about whether JPG is equal to RAW capture.

I know you have been fiddling around with your Panasonic in-camera settings, trying to find one or two in-camera JPG settings that will suffice for every photographic situation you might encounter. I believe you're trying to find a way to garner the satisfaction that many find with Olympus OOC color. That's great, for what it is. But don't try to declare that JPG capture is the equal to RAW capture - it isn't.

The tools available in Lightroom/Aperture are vastly superior to the relatively crude in-camera JPG settings in nature, precision, and degree. And the RAW file format is similarly vastly superior to JPG in richness and depth of image detail content. Combine the richly detailed RAW capture with the power of Lightroom/Aperture and you've got a vastly superior system for image development. That's even easier to use that fiddling around with the few, crude, in-camera JPG settings.

About all that one really can say that's true is that the images can look acceptably similar from both methods under limited circumstances.... when the image has been captured as perfectly as possible (this can be a fair bit of work at moment of capture if you don't have all day to fuss around with in-camera settings) and when you only evaluate them at screen resolution on a forum.

You can take any of the above images and with adjustments make more and less pleasing renditions in color tone, shadow detail, brightness, etc. but the degree to which you can do this is significantly greater if you start with a RAW vs. a JPG.

In the case of those who want to use the famous "Oly JPG colors", capturing both JPG and RAW gives the most capability of all... you have the OOC Oly colors and you have the RAW for any other direction you might want to take a given image, when you have more time and better tools to fine tune and tweak the captures.

BUT, in this scenario - looking at 800 pixel images on a computer display - there is no way you can possibly truly evaluate results in any meaningful way whatsoever. The potential tweaks that can be made to the RAW file in Lightroom/Aperture are so vast that comparison of OOC JPG to any given development of the RAW in LR/Aper is not terribly fruitful.

Camera-processed JPG files are relatively fragile in their ability to be manipulated in post. A little bit more than mild processing adjustments to a camera-processed JPG typically pushes the file data to ruin. If you capture in JPG and discard the RAWs, as you repeatedly pronounce as a wonderful way to work, you have destroyed your ability to effect significant development potential of the image after the moment of capture. Doing so makes no sense whatsoever to me.

And all you have to do to bump into stone walls with JPG capture is:

1) having a very wide dynamic range to capture,

2) detail existing in shadow areas and in highlight areas that you want to retrieve,

3) significant shifts in color balance, levels, curves that you want to effect,

4) conversion to very richly toned B&W renditions,

5) enlargement to wall display sizes...

6) creation of a variety of very different potential development results

and more...

in all of these situations, the RAW will be unmistakably superior to the JPG.
 

mauve

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
1,398
Location
Paris, France
The only obvious difference between those images on screen is the warmer colorimetry of the LR profile vs. Olympus profile. Cool the WB a couple 100°K, and you'll get very close.

Another solution is to create a custom color profile better matching your expectations, with standard charts, but it's tedious.

Cheers,
 

DHart

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
3,525
Location
Scottsdale, Arizona
Real Name
Don
Alf... please note that my above post was directed at comments made by Pete (following a number of other similar posts he has put in other threads), not to your post!

No doubt you can achieve pleasing results for average scenes displayed at computer screen resolution from JPG capture. And OOC JPGs from Oly are generally very pleasing in color rendition.

If the OOC JPGs please you and meet your photographic needs, then that's all that matters!

And as long as you still have those RAW files, the potential for further image development and enhancement is unlimited! Good to have and to keep the RAWs for any and all images that might be meaningful to you or which you might want to develop with different artistic renditions in future. :thumbup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alf

Alf

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
862
Location
Northeastern Tuscany
And as long as you still have those RAW files, the potential for further image development and enhancement is unlimited! Good to have and to keep the RAWs for any and all images that might be meaningful to you or which you might want to develop with different artistic renditions in future. :thumbup:
Agreed. I'm just happy that I can take my time learning composition and still get some nice results.
As you said, the RAWs are there, when the PP bug bites.
 

pjohngren

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
560
Agreed. I'm just happy that I can take my time learning composition and still get some nice results.
As you said, the RAWs are there, when the PP bug bites.
Good approach. It is all too easy to get caught up in the technical side of photography, and forget why we got into this in the first place. If you can get your camera to provide you with acceptable results ooc, then you can spend your time and energy working on taking good shots. I also feel that the restrictions placed on you by having to shoot good jpegs - especially re: getting the exposure perfect - can only help. If you feel you may need them in the future, you can always save the RAWs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alf
Top Bottom