Quality drop when converting RAW images to JPEG?

[Okhotsk]

Hi Folks,

I am new to this board and new to digital photograhpy though I have been taking analogue photos for 30 years.

I have invested in a Digital SLR and a couple of lenses. My RAW shots are coming out fine, but when I convert them to JPEG even the large JPEGs show a noticable drop in sharpness which any amount of manipulation of the image in the RAW stage does not seem to be able to overcome.

The first few shots I took when I bought the DSLR were taken as JPEGS and appear to be razor sharp.

Am I doing something wrong?

The camera is a Canon EOS 50D with a Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS L lens, and the pics are uploaded using the default Canon software supplied with the 50D

Greatful for any advice!

Many thanks and best regards,

Mark Curley
Biddenham, Bedfordshire

[Matt_Hunt]

Hi

Your raw files contain much more information that the 8 bit jpegs - jpeg is a lossy format. In your workflow you want to sharpen the image (sharpen / unsharp mask / high pass filter as required) once in the raw conversion stage and then as a jpeg before printing. The amount of sharpening will depend upon the print size you are making.

HTH

Matt

[Fen]

What quality settings are you using for the output?

[El_Sid]

How much compression are you using? The more you compress a JPEG file the worse the image quality becomes. I tend to stick with more or less minimum compression when converting to JPEG in Photoshop.

What RAW converter are you using? I normally use Canon's DigitalPhotoPro (as supplied with the camera) to convert from RAW (although I occasionally use the old RawShooter freebie as well). Whichever way I use I never finally sharpen in the RAW converter; I always export to PS and then use either UnSharp Mask or High Pass Filter to sharpen prior to saving as JPEG. The only time I use the sharpening tool in DPP is if I'm saving directly to JPEG for 6x4 (or 7*5) en-prints...

[AlexMonro]

Hi Mark, Welcome!

What JPEG compression level are you using? Most software which writes JPEGs allows you to select the compression level, and although I'm not personally familiar with the Canon software, it often defaults to a fairly high level of compression.

Since JPEG is a lossy compression format, this can lead to loss of detail, which can look like a soft image. If you can't find out how to set the compression level in the Canon software, there are a number of free RAW converters which do allow to select the compression level that you can download, such as UFraw. (clicky)

[Okhotsk]

Hi there Alex (and all the folks who kindly responded) - not sure about the compression level - I guess the answer is "whatever the default level is on the Canon software"... I didn't even know I could alter it... I'll have a look tonight and see if I can reduce it. The command on the Canon software is something like "Convert image and save" and this then allows you to select JPEG or TIFF, but I haven't checked any other changeable settings.

Like I said - this is a whole new world for me. Very different from developing rolls of Ilford HP5 in the family bathroom....

I don't yet own anything like Elements or PS (which is anyway far too expensive for me) but I assume there may be ways to improve the image using such software? I think I'll need to go on a course.

[alanS]

Hello,

If you fancy a change from the free Canon software there is other free stuff available (personally I never pay... ) If you get time you could Google "GIMP" which is one that lots of people use. It's no good for RAW though.

[Paul_R]

Hi Mark and welcome aboard

You could always try 'The Raw Workflow Instant JPEF from Raw' software which is free and basically does what it says on the tin, creates JPEG's from RAW files. I have used it in the past but not extensively but it may be a useful and easy way of getting JPEG copies for viewing purposes etc.

I have included a link to the site where you will have to register (and state whether you want the Windows or Mac version etc) before downloading it. I have also included a link to a downloadable PDF user guide for the software.

RAW Workflow Instant JPEG from RAW

PDF User Guide

[Okhotsk]

Thanks Paul - that's very kind.

I'll take a look at this and the GIMP software suggested by Alan when I get home. There appears to be lots of ways to kill the RAW/JPEG cat...!

Thanks and best regards,

Mark

[Paul_R]

No probs, Mark. Enjoy

[benji]

Raw conversion is definitely the best way to go about getting the best quality out of your pictures, in many ways.

You'll just have to get onto that long, steep learning curve, but in the end it will be well worth it.

The amount of sharpening you are able to get when processing a RAW file can be taylored to your needs (=output size).

Your RAW conversion software will have default settings; they are what you may want to check out and alter as and when. You should indeed be able to get razor-sharp results if you want to.

Sorry for not giving more concrete information, but RAW conversion is a wide topic, I wouldn't know where to start to give advice on how to go about it. There are quite a few softwares out there, and they all differ in their approach, although in the end they basically do more or less the same thing.

Keep studying RAW conversion though, and you should be very happy with the results.

Benji

[PeteRob]

The Canon software DPP has a slider for jpg quality - set it to 10 - highest under the convert and save menu. If you have the same picture style selected in DPP as on the camera you should get the "same" size L JPG. The picture styles can be edited for sharpness, contrast, tone and saturation. If you have changed any settings (on camera or in DPP) then that would be the only reason for having different jpgs. DPP is very good - they upgrade it quite often - so worth checking your version. If they add ability to rotate image to correct wonky horizon then that will make it a complete tool. Camera and DPP default to colour space sRGB - this needs to be the same setting on both for the jpgs to be alike.

[JJM74]

As others have said, when converting and saving in DPP set the quality slider to 10 to get the best quality.

Hello,

If you fancy a change from the free Canon software there is other free stuff available (personally I never pay... ) If you get time you could Google "GIMP" which is one that lots of people use. It's no good for RAW though.

Gimp can handle RAW if you add the UFRAW plugin (also works as a standalone). I have it but I always use DPP rather than UFRAW, and then open the Jpegs in GIMP when I want to do things to them. I find DPP a lot easier to get the pictures looking roughly how I want them.

[MickLL]

I'm quite surprised that no-one has suggested the obvious. Save in TIFF not Jpeg and see if the quality improves. (TIFF is generally a loss free format.

If it does then the JPEG save routine needs changing. If it doesn't then something else is wrong.

MickLL

[benji]

I'm quite surprised that no-one has suggested the obvious. Save in TIFF not Jpeg and see if the quality improves.

MickLL

It's not that obvious to spot a difference between a maximum quality jpeg and a tiff.
If you create a fine jpeg from a tiff, it's like having the fine jpeg straight out of camera. The only advantadge about going down the RAW route is that you can more easily taylor the output of your jpeg (contrast, saturation, sharpness, black/white points, etc...).
It's always easier to create a jpeg at the post-processing stage rather than in-camera. It gives you a bit more leeway.

Benji

[Okhotsk]

Dear Benji, Mick and all respondents

I did convert some RAW files to .TIFF last night but the final image seemed pretty much the same as the JPEG to me.

When I clicked (using Canon's DPP) View/Palette and checked the setting the new JPEGS and TIFFS are all set to 0 for Sharpness. Changing this to 300, 350 or even 400 (depending on the pic) seems to imporve the sharpness but not bring it back to the RAW image quality.

I also noticed a couple of other things.

1. The first few days I had this new DSLR I was shooting JPEG format (didn't know any better) and these JPEGs, straight out of the camera are razor sharp.

2. All the JPEGs seem sharper when viewed in DPP after conversion. If I quit out of DPP and just view them via the Window standard viewer, the are noticeably less sharp.

Is that normal???

Cheers/Mark

[alanS]

I shoot RAW and produce a JPEG on my pc and I usually keep them both. I rarely produce a TIFF as the file would be a lot larger than both the RAW and the JPEG combined and I'd fill my hard disc up. Still, discs are cheap these days so it's an option if there's any increase in quality. Can't see much myself.

[Fen]

1. The first few days I had this new DSLR I was shooting JPEG format (didn't know any better) and these JPEGs, straight out of the camera are razor sharp.

The camera will add sharpening to the images when it creates the JPEGs. The RAW file is just that, RAW data from the sensor and nothing will have been done to it.

2. All the JPEGs seem sharper when viewed in DPP after conversion. If I quit out of DPP and just view them via the Window standard viewer, the are noticeably less sharp.

I would guess that the windows viewer is scaling the photos to fit on the screen, this would probably lower the visual quality.

[MickLL]

I'm quite surprised that no-one has suggested the obvious. Save in TIFF not Jpeg and see if the quality improves.

MickLL

It's not that obvious to spot a difference between a maximum quality jpeg and a tiff.
If you create a fine jpeg from a tiff, it's like having the fine jpeg straight out of camera. The only advantadge about going down the RAW route is that you can more easily taylor the output of your jpeg (contrast, saturation, sharpness, black/white points, etc...).
It's always easier to create a jpeg at the post-processing stage rather than in-camera. It gives you a bit more leeway.

Benji

I think that you misunderstood - not that it matters much in the light of subsequent posts.

I understood the OP to say that JPG created from RAW seemed unsharp (see the thread title). Other posters suggested the problem was saving JPG with low quality. I suggested saving from RAW into TIFF to check if it was a pure JPG issue.

What I missed saying (rather taking it for granted) was that all RAW files saved in whatever format will need some sharpening.

MickLL

[benji]

I'm quite surprised that no-one has suggested the obvious. Save in TIFF not Jpeg and see if the quality improves.

MickLL

It's not that obvious to spot a difference between a maximum quality jpeg and a tiff.
If you create a fine jpeg from a tiff, it's like having the fine jpeg straight out of camera. The only advantadge about going down the RAW route is that you can more easily taylor the output of your jpeg (contrast, saturation, sharpness, black/white points, etc...).
It's always easier to create a jpeg at the post-processing stage rather than in-camera. It gives you a bit more leeway.

Benji

I think that you misunderstood - not that it matters much in the light of subsequent posts.

I understood the OP to say that JPG created from RAW seemed unsharp (see the thread title). Other posters suggested the problem was saving JPG with low quality. I suggested saving from RAW into TIFF to check if it was a pure JPG issue.

What I missed saying (rather taking it for granted) was that all RAW files saved in whatever format will need some sharpening.

MickLL

Yes, I did misunderstood where you were coming from, Mick!
You're quite right.
Benji