Camera Raw retouching: I know if I want to work on my NEF raw files on PS, it would open up the Camera Raw first to perform some settings before converting the image as jpg for further...

tenny52 Loc: San Francisco

I know if I want to work on my NEF raw files on PS, it would open up the Camera Raw first to perform some settings before converting the image as jpg for further PS enhancement.
Is it necessary to use the Filter-Camera Raw again to do more after a few moves on the PS?
Is it common practice to use Filter- Camera Raw to work on jpg images?

newcamman

Please define what u mean by ps. Maybe then i can understand your question. I use my nef processor daily and would like to help you

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

tenny52 wrote:

I know if I want to work on my NEF raw files on PS, it would open up the Camera Raw first to perform some settings before converting the image as jpg for further PS enhancement.
Is it necessary to use the Filter-Camera Raw again to do more after a few moves on the PS?
Is it common practice to use Filter- Camera Raw to work on jpg images?

Assuming you are referring to Photoshop, once you use Camera Raw to open the file and make changes and hit save, you will be creating a PSD or TIFF file (depending on your settings in Preferences). You only use Adobe Camera RAW to open a RAW file and convert it to a format that Photoshop can read. There is no reason to use ACR on a JPEG file. If you want to make similar adjustments to a JPEG, use Lightroom.

TheDman Loc: USA

rgrenaderphoto wrote:

Assuming you are referring to Photoshop, once you use Camera Raw to open the file and make changes and hit save, you will be creating a PSD or TIFF file (depending on your settings in Preferences). You only use Adobe Camera RAW to open a RAW file and convert it to a format that Photoshop can read. There is no reason to use ACR on a JPEG file. If you want to make similar adjustments to a JPEG, use Lightroom.

Using ACR is using Lightroom.

There's just as much reason to use the Camera Raw filter on your jpgs as there is curves or levels. It's just another tool in the bag.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

TheDman wrote:

Using ACR is using Lightroom.

There's just as much reason to use the Camera Raw filter on your jpgs as there is curves or levels. It's just another tool in the bag.

????????

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Tenny, I view ACR as developing the negative. PS is my equivalent to making the print.
--Bob

tenny52 wrote:

I know if I want to work on my NEF raw files on PS, it would open up the Camera Raw first to perform some settings before converting the image as jpg for further PS enhancement.
Is it necessary to use the Filter-Camera Raw again to do more after a few moves on the PS?
Is it common practice to use Filter- Camera Raw to work on jpg images?

tenny52 Loc: San Francisco

rmalarz wrote:

Tenny, I view ACR as developing the negative. PS is my equivalent to making the print.
--Bob

If I just want to do one NEF raw file, I might not want to use LR but to go straight to PS.
Isn't it PS:Camera Raw doing the same job as LR:ACR?

TheDman Loc: USA

speters wrote:

????????

Lightroom uses Abobe Camera Raw as its develop module.

TheDman Loc: USA

tenny52 wrote:

If I just want to do one NEF raw file, I might not want to use LR but to go straight to PS.
Isn't it PS:Camera Raw doing the same job as LR:ACR?

ACR stands for Adobe Camera Raw.

tenny52 Loc: San Francisco

TheDman wrote:

ACR stands for Adobe Camera Raw.

So if I have PS-Camera Raw then I can bypass LR only which I find synchronizing the settings for batch job a lot more conveniently. Agree?
However, I can save the setting on PS:Camera Raw as .xmp file which works like the preset in LR.

TheDman Loc: USA

tenny52 wrote:

So if I have PS-Camera Raw then I can bypass LR only which I find synchronizing the settings for batch job a lot more conveniently. Agree?
However, I can save the setting on PS:Camera Raw as .xmp file which works like the preset in LR.

Yes, as far as image processing goes, if you use one you don't have to use the other, since they perform the same processing functions.

An xmp file is a sidecar file that stores your changes to a raw file. It's not a preset, but I guess could be saved as a preset... I don't use them so I'm not sure.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

tenny52 wrote:

I know if I want to work on my NEF raw files on PS, it would open up the Camera Raw first to perform some settings before converting the image as jpg for further PS enhancement.
Is it necessary to use the Filter-Camera Raw again to do more after a few moves on the PS?
Is it common practice to use Filter- Camera Raw to work on jpg images?

If you are using Adobe Camera Raw on your raw files, take them as far as you can in camera raw, then use a 16 bit psd file in ProPhoto color space to continue your editing in PS. I would not recommend enhancing a jpeg. With it's 8 bit accuracy, small color space and compression - it makes it least suitable for editing. Better to edit the psd file, and export after all your edits are complete.

If you like the type of adjustment made possible in camera raw, and would like to edit a bit mapped file - jpeg, psd, tiff, png - you have two options - you can open the file as raw in Photoshop, or if you are using CC, you can use the Camera Raw filter.

You do NOT have to go to Lightroom to edit a jpeg or any other bit mapped image in PS.

tenny52 Loc: San Francisco

Gene51 wrote:

If you are using Adobe Camera Raw on your raw file... (show quote)

Thanks Gene, I like what you said about editing a jpeg is least favorable, that would make more reasons to shoot raw.
But I don't understand how to open a jpeg as raw in PS. what is the advantage?
If jpeg file is the only option, is there any reason to use PS:Filter-Camera Raw that PS' normal operations can't do.
For instance, PS:CR's Level function differs from the PS:Adjustment-Level?
Of course the latter is in a layer of which the opacity can be adjusted; or use the former for habitual or convenience sake.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

TheDman wrote:

Using ACR is using Lightroom.

There's just as much reason to use the Camera Raw filter on your jpgs as there is curves or levels. It's just another tool in the bag.

Why use ACR when Lightroom is so much more capable? I admit Lightroom can have a steep learning curve, but when you grasp what it can do, why anything else.

tenny52 Loc: San Francisco

rgrenaderphoto wrote:

Why use ACR when Lightroom is so much more capable? I admit Lightroom can have a steep learning curve, but when you grasp what it can do, why anything else.

I agree, PS is mainly to do the final enhancement prior to export as jpg.
Why PS:Filter:Camera Raw is there? Is it an Adobe freebie for the people who don't have access to LR?