WPF - World Photography Forum
Home Gallery Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Welcome to World Photography Forum!
Welcome!

Thank you for finding your way to World Photography Forum, a dedicated community for photographers and enthusiasts. There's a variety of forums, a wonderful gallery, and what's more, we are absolutely FREE. You are very welcome to join, take part in the discussion, and post your pictures!

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.


Go Back   World Photography Forum > General Photography > The Photography Forum


The Photography Forum General Photography Related Discussion.

In camera processing RAW v JPG comparison

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 20-02-06, 16:05
Don Hoey's Avatar
Don Hoey Don Hoey is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 4,462
Default

I have found this to be quite interesting and decided to do another image with colour in case any differences showed up there.

The chosen subject was a toasted bacon and tomato sandwich ( Duncan influence here ) .... but .... I ate it during the set up.
Moral appears to be have a good breakfast before using food as a subject.

So I decided to look a DP Review as now no bacon left.

As the timeline of digital development I looked at and compared the D100, D70, and D50 as they are all around 6 megapixels.

There is in each case a difference between RAW and JPEG but as time has moved on so the differences have become less but it is still there.
In the case of the D100 ( Announced Feb02 ) the sharper Raw conversion is put down to the greater processing power of a PC.
The D70 ( Announced Jan04 ) converted RAW image shows greater contrast and colour saturation than straight JPEG.
The D50 ( Announced April05 ) shows little difference.

The D2X ( dream machine ) converted RAW appears to show better contrast and colour saturation than JPEG.

D100 review http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond100/page11.asp
D70 review http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page11.asp
D50 review http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page12.asp
D2X review http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond2x/page13.asp

Don
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 20-02-06, 20:53
Canis Vulpes's Avatar
Canis Vulpes Canis Vulpes is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 51
Posts: 4,398
Default

I tried my own test but just for sharpness. I used a recent Grays of Westminster price list as it was the first thing printed to hand.

Using a tripod in conjunction with self timer mode to avoid any shake, no flash and Nikon Capture (NC) as RAW convertor.

50mm f1.8 on D2X set for Aperture priority f8 and ISO 100 to produce RAW and JPEG fine (opimum quality)

Pic 1 shows full EXIF from NC and the focus point.
Pic 2 shows JPEG conversion of full photo in fine (otimum quality)
Pic 3 shows NC Conversion of full photo NC4.04
Pic 4 shows JPEG 100% crop around focus area
Pic 5 shows NC 100% crop around focus area

Please note, in camera sharpness set to medium low and full photo shots are set to JPEG level 9 to get under 341kB filesize.
Continued...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg ncrawtestexif.jpg (296.1 KB, 12 views)
File Type: jpg jpegcamerafine.jpg (245.5 KB, 7 views)
File Type: jpg ncconversion.jpg (247.9 KB, 6 views)
File Type: jpg jpeg100pccrop.jpg (131.5 KB, 14 views)
File Type: jpg nc100pccrop.jpg (138.6 KB, 13 views)
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 20-02-06, 20:56
Canis Vulpes's Avatar
Canis Vulpes Canis Vulpes is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 51
Posts: 4,398
Default

Here is a composite of the two 100% crops, are the labels correct? My eyes are getting tried after a long day in Central London, again!

I thought there was a big difference but not so sure - tired eyes!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg compositeview.jpg (198.8 KB, 22 views)
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 20-02-06, 21:09
Andy's Avatar
Andy Andy is offline  
Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,273
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Fox
Here is a composite of the two 100% crops, are the labels correct? My eyes are getting tried after a long day in Central London, again!

I thought there was a big difference but not so sure - tired eyes!
I'd put the jpg ahead? Not much in it anyway... I'll stick to jpg for the time being.
cheers,
Andy
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 20-02-06, 21:20
Canis Vulpes's Avatar
Canis Vulpes Canis Vulpes is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 51
Posts: 4,398
Default

When I did the composite I thought JPEG left and RAW right but got dazed and swapped them over. I am now convinced RAW left and JPEG right, contrary to the labels!

There is not much in it but when you compare the relevant images on DPreview differences look about the same.

Please note, photos on post 12 are faithful and correct.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 20-02-06, 21:37
Don Hoey's Avatar
Don Hoey Don Hoey is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 4,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Fox
There is not much in it but when you compare the relevant images on DPreview differences look about the same.
So it does appear that as digital has moved on the differences have as good as disapeared. Would probably get the same result from the new D200.

Curses this new kit is good.

Don
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 20-02-06, 22:25
robski robski is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kent UK
Posts: 3,739
Default

Thanks for confirming my results. Many have made the point that Raw is clearly sharper than jpeg. I've been puzzled by this as my tests always showed hardly any difference. On another test I did the jpeg showed a slight cluster of a few pixels on a bright highlight.

FYI the needle on the left was the RAW version.

The logic of the jpeg encoder is to first compress colour and preserve brightness and resolution. Then progressively reduce the number of brightness levels and resolution as the compression factor is increased.

It would be interesting to compare the difference in colour on RAW and fine jpeg.
__________________
Rob

-----------------------------------------------------
Solar powered Box Brownie Mk2

Captain Sunshine, to be such a man as he, and walk so pure between the earth and the sea.

WPF Gallery
Birdforum Gallery
http://www.robertstocker.co.uk updated

Last edited by robski; 20-02-06 at 22:32.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 20-02-06, 23:38
Don Hoey's Avatar
Don Hoey Don Hoey is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 4,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robski
It would be interesting to compare the difference in colour on RAW and fine jpeg.
Does that mean it's back to a toasted BLT test then ???
I'll show your post to the management !!

Don

Last edited by Don Hoey; 20-02-06 at 23:58.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 20-02-06, 23:49
robski robski is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kent UK
Posts: 3,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hoey
Does that mean it's back to a toasted BLT test then ???
I'll your post to the management !!

Don
LOL Don

See if you can get the shot before sinking your teeth into it.
__________________
Rob

-----------------------------------------------------
Solar powered Box Brownie Mk2

Captain Sunshine, to be such a man as he, and walk so pure between the earth and the sea.

WPF Gallery
Birdforum Gallery
http://www.robertstocker.co.uk updated
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 21-02-06, 08:49
yelvertoft's Avatar
yelvertoft yelvertoft is offline  
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: North Essex, UK
Age: 59
Posts: 8,486
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robski
LOL Don

See if you can get the shot before sinking your teeth into it.
Or you could do a "before and after".
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 19:29.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.