Hey Photogs I have a question

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

I hope you can help me with. I shoot in RAW. When I download the raw shots look better than when I covert a copy to a jpeg. How can I make the JPEG look like the RAW? Does this make any sense?

[valerief]

1. Can you convert to png instead? Is that any better?

But I'm not a photographer, so...

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

2. Don't know..........

let me check.

[CC]

3. They should not look that different

on the monitor but there will be some difference. When you convert to jpg you are condensing them and throwing out a lot of information that is in the raw files. I'm not aware of a way to convert to jpg and retain all the info from the raw file. Maybe adjust you settings when converting so it appear most like the original. Not much help I know. Sorry.

[NV Whino]

4. When you convert to JPEG you condense the file and lose infomation

You can go into a photo editing program and play with the settings, which will bring you closer to the RAW file, but it still will not have the original info. Saving as a TIFF will get you closer.

[Major Nikon]

5. Need more information

Where do the RAW pictures look better? If you are just looking at them with the windows explorer default application what you are really looking at is the jpeg image that is embedded into the RAW file.

When you convert the RAW file to a jpeg, you have to specify things like white balance and exposure, otherwise it's going to go with some kind of default setting that may or may not be what you want. Most conversion software has an auto setting, which may not be the best choice, but will probably be better than any default setting which doesn't fit the particular image.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

6. I mostly just auto convert now and

I'd like to not do that. I've noticed when I open the RAW in Photoshop I can edit the image but frankly it'd be like me performing surgery........any hints?

[Major Nikon]

7. Often I hit the auto button and make adjustments from there

Most of your adjustments are going to be on the first tab. Things like white balance, exposure, and contrast are what you are most likely to play with the most. I prefer not to do any sharpening at that point so I turn that off. I do sharpening at the very end of image editing.

[Binkie The Clown]

8. JPEG has many options, including lossless compression

Most photo editing programs have an "options" button on the file selection dialog popup when you save as JPEG that lets you choose the quality vs size trade-off, or opt for lossless compression.

[ManiacJoe]

9. It is all about the software you are using to view and edit the files.

When you view the raw files after you upload them, most likely your image viewer is showing you the full-size JPG preview, not doing its own interpretation of the raw data.

The editors and viewers that do their own interpretation of the raw data do not apply all the camera settings to the image like the software from the camera maker does. The third-party software (Adobe, Corel, etc.) apply their own presets to the images created from the raw files, which may or may not look close to what the camera maker's software did.

To get your converted JPGs to look like the preview JPGs, you will need to create a preset for your viewer/editor to use so that it knows how you want your images to look. Take a look at the presets included with your editor/viewer. They often have presets similar (but not identical) to the camera makers.

[alfredo]

10. On OSX the new Photos app allows lossless adjustments. Nearly everything I post

was first passed through Photos, then exported a maximum quality Jpeg. I resize in GIMP, and if needed, I do some tweaking of the image. More often than not, nothing more needs to be done.

[ManiacJoe]

11. Sounds similar to Adobe Lightroom.

[alfredo]

12. It's a simplified, dumbed down version of Aperture. Still does enough for me.