Why I now make only RAW files - a bit of a story.
Sep 7, 2022 13:58:47 #
Ysarex wrote:
You didn't manage to avoid it. It's just less apparent in your edit and that's because you made less of a change. It's still there and it is visible in the edit you did. Had you darkened the sky or continued to remove cyan to match my raw processed version, the editing degradation would become more visible.
Nothing bad happens if you do nothing. The degradation worsens with bigger changes.
Nothing bad happens if you do nothing. The degradation worsens with bigger changes.
In other words, I did manage to avoid it. So what you should have said was that you can't make excessive changes without causing issues. And "excessive" depends on the skill of the person editing the image. But the same can be said of someone editing during the raw conversion.
Here is another version with some additional changes including a gradient in the sky, no additional sharpening or clarity. The side effects are minimal at 100% (who needs to go higher).
Maybe the key here is that the JPEG is saved only once so there is no degradation from multiple saves. The original JPEG remains in the Capture folder just like the camera originally saved it.
Sep 7, 2022 14:32:08 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
selmslie wrote:
In other words, I did manage to avoid it.
You did not avoid it. It's there and it's visible, just not as visible as Profbowman's version which made bigger changes.
selmslie wrote:
So what you should have said was that you can't make excessive changes without causing issues.
I didn't use the term excessive I said bigger changes.
Sep 7, 2022 16:21:49 #
Ysarex wrote:
You did not avoid it. It's there and it's visible, just not as visible as Profbowman's version which made bigger changes.
My second post contained bigger changes.
It has a lot to do with the software. I loaded your JPEG directly into PWP 7 and edited it as an 8-bit image (24-bit JPEG). That brought out the problems you were looking for. So then l loaded it and converted to 48-bit TIFF before editing and did the same changes - tone curve, saturation and a gradient in the sky - basically what I did in Capture One. The results were better (see below) but when I saved it as a JPEG there are still some artifacts. But there was no banding from the tone curve applied to the entire image or the gradient in the sky.
But PWP is a primitive editor and version 7 hasn't been updated since 2016. It can't hold a candle to Capture One which appears to convert the 8-bit JPEG to 32-bit (96-bit color) or more for editing without being asked.
Sep 7, 2022 16:33:18 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
selmslie wrote:
I agree software matters. What little JPEG editing I do I get best results using a parametric editor like C1 or LR. SilkyPix used to sell a JPEG specific editor for which they claimed it suppressed JPEG editing artifacts -- never tried it.
Sep 7, 2022 17:24:18 #
Ysarex wrote:
I agree software matters. What little JPEG editing I do I get best results using a parametric editor like C1 or LR. SilkyPix used to sell a JPEG specific editor for which they claimed it suppressed JPEG editing artifacts -- never tried it.
I agree that software is part of the uncertainty of the outcomes, but workflow is also part of the difference. I use IrfanView and MS Paint as my editing tools. IarfanView to make the adjustments I want to different parts of the image if that is what I want, and Paint to stich them together.
My workflow would be to do a large crop on the image for composition since I am legally blind and cannot format the photos well in my camera. Then I do any visual adjustments with a large screen monitor and finally resiz3e the image to something smaller.
Here would be my best attempt. I do not know if it solves the problem with the sky since I could not see what some of you may have seen. --Richard
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.