Raw vs Jpeg. With Lightroom Presets & Workflow In Mind!
UPDATED 12/08:
As a photographer I like the RAW file format. I find more flexibility in post production, and ultimately a better image quality with less hassle. Having said that, there are still plenty of JPEG shooters.
What’s It All About:
This article is not so much about the which format is better. We’ll save that for another day. The situation in question is editing images in speedy workflow programs like Adobe Lightroom. Lightroom has revolutionized photo workflow because it’s fast, and batches are a snap using Develop Presets.
Presets allow you to add effects and settings to images with a single click, or even apply them to thousands of images. This is priceless when it comes to the photographers creative workflow. Also this type of workflow is non destructive to the photo, meaning that you can make edits, and reset them to original at any time. Your changes are stored as a separate file, and are not locked to an image until you export a new file with those settings applied
RAW & JPEG with Lightroom Presets In Mind:
JPEG responds totally differently to these edits than RAW files. Not long ago you could not even use a RAW style editing process on JPEG, because software did not allow that type of non destructive editing. However with the introduction of programs like Lightroom, and Camera RAW updates in the past few years, things have changed. The issue is that what looks amazing on a Raw file may well make a JPEG look horrible, overexposed, too contrasty, ect. The reason for this is not totally clear, but JPEG defiantly seems more fussy about edits than RAW files do.
As many of you know I produce Lightroom Presets for my studio, as well as sell them here on Seim Effects. My Power Workflow2 presets account for both RAW & JPEG formats. From my research in this (and nobody seems to be talking about it much) it seems the only solution is to make a separate preset for RAW and JPEG. This is rather a hassle especially for those who shoot both. Even the presets that Adobe includes with Lightroom have this RAW/JPEG problem.
On my part I needed to cover all aspects for photographers who buy my products. In order to make Power Workflow work on both I had to make two sets. Staring with the RAW version of the preset I would tweak things like brightness, contract, blacks ect until I achieved the same look on the JPEG version of the image. It is a hassle but can always be accomplished.
The problem for the photo world is that most presets are designed with RAW in mind. Will nearly everyone switch to RAW? Do companies like Adobe need to train their software to better handle JPEG files? I think raw works better, but some pro’s and most consumers will continue to shoot with JPEG. I myself intend to gain a better understanding of the core variables in the files and how to best edit them in an efficient manner. As for me I am actively making both. You can download the FREE samples from Power WOrkflow2 here, if you’d like some effects that offer RAW & JPEG versions.
Your thoughts and ideas are welcome. Gavin Seim
January 30th, 20081:49 pm at
Interesting observations. I’m a 99% RAW shooter so I’ve not run into this myself.
March 3rd, 20088:02 pm at
[...] Learn about how presets effect JPEG & Raw files differently. [...]
July 29th, 20082:40 pm at
Well, the reason I was looking at this was because there is a considerable difference in how lightroom handles RAW vs. JPG. I was noticing that while I was recording correct exposure on my camera, whenever I imported them into Lightroom as a RAW file, they were considerably darker, the vast majority looking underexposed. However, when I look at my raw files in Nikons dedicated software ViewNX and Capture NX, they are as I originally intended…integrity intact! So, it leaves a big dilemma here. I prefer editing in Lightroom simply because it is sextremely easy, but that is taking up way too much time with the RAW files…so thanks for bringing this up.
Annie
December 23rd, 200810:43 am at
I’ve always found it odd that people continue to use Adobe products to process RAW files. They look inexcusably AWFUL and it’s no surprise that real pros. That’s, REAL pros…Joe McNally, Bruce Dale, etc…not the online pros that abound these days….do not use softwares such as Lightroom or Aperture. They use Capture NX, or Canon’s DPP. Why? It looks better, right from the camera, and unless you are employing well-paid assistants to render your RAW files for you, why would you bother with anything but the manufacturer’s software? Time is money. Lightroom’s organizational skills are handy,, but who cares when you have to spend EONS just to get a RAW file to resemble what could have been a JPEG from the camera.
January 6th, 200912:04 am at
Lightroom photos only look bad because most people dont know how to process RAW photos. Real pros DO use Lightroom. Check out benchrisman.com for example. Those are the best photos out there – all done in Lightroom. Lightroom requires users to dial in most of the settings, and people just dont have an eye for whats correct.
January 6th, 201012:06 am at
You make some good points. Personally I handle jpegs and RAW images separately. I find jpegs are great just for a quick shooting when you want to simply capture a moment or you want to take a large number of photos but have limited time to process them. But I use RAW for the serious stuff where I want more control over the final image. It’s kind of 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. For alot of users (non pro/hobbyist etc) jpeg let’s them max their time behind the camera rather than the monitor. The flip side of the coin, IMHO is having the monitor calibrated properly and then of course a printer that will give a true print. This, of course, assumes the editor has an eye for digital development It does get complex and time consuming. For those special shots like portraits and landscapes especially if you dabble in HDR you can’t beat RAW, tho… I use LR and CS4 but love filters and presets because it saves time.
In the final analysis, in my mind, jpeg or RAW?? Really depends on what you are shooting. Anyway that’s my 2 cents….