Ugly Hedgehog - Photography
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Analysis
JPEG Camera settings for Optimum Dynamic Range
Page 1 of 4 next> last>>
Dec 20, 2022 12:37:14   #
rwm283main Loc: Terryville, CT
 
I'm shooting with Fujifilm cameras, I have an X-T2 and an X-S10. I'm trying to get the jpeg images SOOC close to what I can get from adjusting the equivalent RAW image. I'm especially concerned with the sky and how little range I have when attempting to get the jpeg image to look more like the adjusted RAW image. I'm using Capture 1 for my post processing. I use LR at times for post processing the jpeg images and I find that I am able to get the sky to look closer to what I end up with in my RAW image. Bottom line, is it possible to get the sky to look good straight out of the camera?

Adjusted JPEG Image
Adjusted JPEG Image...
(Download)

Adjusted RAW Image
Adjusted RAW Image...
(Download)

Reply
Dec 20, 2022 12:38:35   #
srg
 
rwm283main wrote:
I'm shooting with Fujifilm cameras, I have an X-T2 and an X-S10. I'm trying to get the jpeg images SOOC close to what I can get from adjusting the equivalent RAW image. I'm especially concerned with the sky and how little range I have when attempting to get the jpeg image to look more like the adjusted RAW image. I'm using Capture 1 for my post processing. I use LR at times for post processing the jpeg images and I find that I am able to get the sky to look closer to what I end up with in my RAW image. Bottom line, is it possible to get the sky to look good straight out of the camera?
I'm shooting with Fujifilm cameras, I have an X-T2... (show quote)


no

Reply
Dec 20, 2022 12:41:49   #
rwm283main Loc: Terryville, CT
 
srg wrote:
no


Well, that answers my question. Thank You!
I suspect there's just too much jpeg compression. Just a thought.
Rich

Reply
 
 
Dec 20, 2022 12:46:51   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
rwm283main wrote:
Bottom line, is it possible to get the sky to look good straight out of the camera?

Bottom line the answer is no.

I also shoot with Fuji cameras. You do have the option with your X-T2 to use the camera's built-in DR function. It will extend the DR range of the JPEGs but nothing is free. It functions by protecting the highlights and then applying a reduced contrast tone curve. That reduced contrast tone curve may prove unwanted in your foreground and so you're still left with post processing work -- so then might was well just bite the bullet and process the raw files.

Reply
Dec 20, 2022 12:50:14   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
rwm283main wrote:
Well, that answers my question. Thank You!
I suspect there's just too much jpeg compression. Just a thought.
Rich

It's not an issue of JPEG compression it's an issue of the tone curve application in the the camera image processor. You're basically selecting a subject that is beyond the basic capabilities of the camera processor. Bottom line: you've selected a subject that requires local adjustment -- lighten/darken/adjust contrast/etc. of one part of the image only. Cameras don't do that.

Reply
Dec 20, 2022 13:12:48   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
You have a very high contrast subject - as mentioned use the DR function at lowest possible ISO. If I were shooting this, I would use the in camera auto HDR function of my Sonys - where it combines 3 exposures - but it is still hard to get perfection SOOC !

Reply
Dec 20, 2022 13:15:44   #
rwm283main Loc: Terryville, CT
 
Ysarex wrote:
Bottom line the answer is no.

I also shoot with Fuji cameras. You do have the option with your X-T2 to use the camera's built-in DR function. It will extend the DR range of the JPEGs but nothing is free. It functions by protecting the highlights and then applying a reduced contrast tone curve. That reduced contrast tone curve may prove unwanted in your foreground and so you're still left with post processing work -- so then might was well just bite the bullet and process the raw files.


Thank you for commenting. I was hoping that I could tweak some of the many jpeg settings in the camera so that I could achieve what I’m looking for. But, even if it came close and I still needed to make adjustments I’d be better off shooting in RAW, where I have the greatest control over the image dynamics.

Reply
 
 
Dec 20, 2022 13:22:17   #
rwm283main Loc: Terryville, CT
 
Ysarex wrote:
It's not an issue of JPEG compression it's an issue of the tone curve application in the the camera image processor. You're basically selecting a subject that is beyond the basic capabilities of the camera processor. Bottom line: you've selected a subject that requires local adjustment -- lighten/darken/adjust contrast/etc. of one part of the image only. Cameras don't do that.


Thank you for commenting.
Your explanation makes sense. I was hoping to take advantage of some of the camera settings, which there are many in the Fujifilm camera line, to get my jpeg images to look close to what my post processed RAW images look like. I’ll stick to shooting in RAW.
Rich

Reply
Dec 20, 2022 13:56:19   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
rwm283main wrote:
Thank you for commenting.
Your explanation makes sense. I was hoping to take advantage of some of the camera settings, which there are many in the Fujifilm camera line, to get my jpeg images to look close to what my post processed RAW images look like.

You can certainly make the effort to learn the DR function in your X-T2. It will be successful for less extreme cases. The problem is learning to make that assessment and so the effort at the camera always being sure to also capture a raw file -- the camera can only do so much. Here's an extreme example which shares a trait with your example posted above.

It's just a snapshot in the park -- first image the SOOC JPEG (resized) and then my processed image. No camera functions could achieve my processed image and that includes DR and automated HDR functions. The trait this image shares with your photo above is two different white balances. The sky in your photo and mine is daylight WB while the foreground is open shade WB -- simple thing for Capture One to handle but impossible for any camera that I know.




(Download)

Reply
Dec 20, 2022 15:19:55   #
rwm283main Loc: Terryville, CT
 
Ysarex wrote:
You can certainly make the effort to learn the DR function in your X-T2. It will be successful for less extreme cases. The problem is learning to make that assessment and so the effort at the camera always being sure to also capture a raw file -- the camera can only do so much. Here's an extreme example which shares a trait with your example posted above.
.


Wow! Your processed RAW image is incredible. It’s nice to see how much you can recover in an image in post processing when shooting RAW.
Your sample images should convince any serious photographer that shooting in RAW is the way to go.

I take it you metered on the sky realizing the potential in PP of recovering the darks.

I would think camera engineers should be able to create processing algorithms built into the camera by now to accomplish what we can do to a RAW image in PP. Maybe not.

Thanks for commenting.

Reply
Dec 20, 2022 15:46:49   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
rwm283main wrote:
Wow! Your processed RAW image is incredible. It’s nice to see how much you can recover in an image in post processing when shooting RAW.

Don't take this wrong -- you're using common terminology but I object. I didn't recover anything. I processed the data that I knew I captured. It didn't have to be recovered -- I never misplaced it to begin with.

rwm283main wrote:
Your sample images should convince any serious photographer that shooting in RAW is the way to go.

I take it you metered on the sky realizing the potential in PP of recovering the darks.

Yes, I metered and exposed this image as I do all my photos. Place the brightest diffuse highlight at the sensor threshold and click.
rwm283main wrote:
I would think camera engineers should be able to create processing algorithms built into the camera by now to accomplish what we can do to a RAW image in PP. Maybe not.

Computer algorithms AI or not can't second guess our intentions. In the end they have to apply rules based on averages. If you try and take an "average" photo they can handle it. Stray too far from average and the ball goes to your court.

Reply
 
 
Dec 20, 2022 17:06:40   #
rwm283main Loc: Terryville, CT
 
Ysarex wrote:
Computer algorithms AI or not can't second guess our intentions. In the end they have to apply rules based on averages. If you try and take an "average" photo they can handle it. Stray too far from average and the ball goes to your court.


Thank you again for commenting.

Your explanations are quite helpful understanding the science of digital photography and image processing.

Rich

Reply
Dec 20, 2022 22:57:13   #
Wallen Loc: Middle Earth
 
rwm283main wrote:
I'm shooting with Fujifilm cameras, I have an X-T2 and an X-S10. I'm trying to get the jpeg images SOOC close to what I can get from adjusting the equivalent RAW image. I'm especially concerned with the sky and how little range I have when attempting to get the jpeg image to look more like the adjusted RAW image. I'm using Capture 1 for my post processing. I use LR at times for post processing the jpeg images and I find that I am able to get the sky to look closer to what I end up with in my RAW image. Bottom line, is it possible to get the sky to look good straight out of the camera?
I'm shooting with Fujifilm cameras, I have an X-T2... (show quote)


The bit size and compression limits the dynamic range of a jpeg image. If the scene has a narrow dynamic range, this would not be a problem. If the scene has a wider dynamic range, you need to bracket the scene and merge it at post to capture as much as possible. Movement limit the scenes you can bracket. Anything that has movement can be tricky if worth the try.

Reply
Dec 21, 2022 07:33:28   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
I could never get my final photographs to look the way they do shooting jpg. I shoot RAW combined with ETTR/EBTR and process for the final.
--Bob
rwm283main wrote:
I'm shooting with Fujifilm cameras, I have an X-T2 and an X-S10. I'm trying to get the jpeg images SOOC close to what I can get from adjusting the equivalent RAW image. I'm especially concerned with the sky and how little range I have when attempting to get the jpeg image to look more like the adjusted RAW image. I'm using Capture 1 for my post processing. I use LR at times for post processing the jpeg images and I find that I am able to get the sky to look closer to what I end up with in my RAW image. Bottom line, is it possible to get the sky to look good straight out of the camera?
I'm shooting with Fujifilm cameras, I have an X-T2... (show quote)

SOOC
SOOC...
(Download)

Final
Final...
(Download)

SOOC
SOOC...
(Download)

Final
Final...
(Download)

Reply
Dec 21, 2022 09:09:02   #
rwm283main Loc: Terryville, CT
 
rmalarz wrote:
I could never get my final photographs to look the way they do shooting jpg. I shoot RAW combined with ETTR/EBTR and process for the final.
--Bob


Thanks Bob for commenting and providing some convincing examples of what can be achieved shooting in RAW.
Great black and white images!
Rich

Reply
Page 1 of 4 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Analysis
UglyHedgehog.com
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.