Question about Digital Photo Professional

[bnnrcn]

I have got DPP 3.10 on my computer.I am learning to use it with the help of Instruction Manual.When I convert the edited raw image to jpg format,the quality of the image gets worse and I don't know why? Also in the tool palette if I make some edits on the RGB part,it can't be seen in the converted jpg version.Let's say if I increase shapness from 0 to 200 in the RGB part with the raw image,the shapness is still 0 in the converted jpg version and I have to make the same edit in the RGB part for converted jpg version again.I don't know why?

[shreds]

You need to consider what a jpeg is:- A compressed limited recreation of your RAW original. Lots of information is thrown away in the compression process even if you maintain a large file. Colour space is also relevant as the computer may be changing it to an sRGB image in the save which will significantly alter the gamut.

Take a look at the tutorials

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...amic-range.htm
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...imagetypes.htm
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...conversion.htm

For starters if you haven't seen these before.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Ian,I will read the tutorials.So do you re-edit your image after converting to jpg.Is this the usual way?

You need to consider what a jpeg is:- A compressed limited recreation of your RAW original. Lots of information is thrown away in the compression process even if you maintain a large file. Colour space is also relevant as the computer may be changing it to an sRGB image in the save which will significantly alter the gamut.

Take a look at the tutorials

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...amic-range.htm
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...imagetypes.htm
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...conversion.htm

For starters if you haven't seen these before.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Ian,I read the tutorals very quıckly to get the point and I will read them again more thoroughly.What I understand is that I lose information when I convert from raw to jpg.So,what is the solution,what do you do when you edit your photos,don't you convert them?Even ıf you want to upload photos to CIC you have to convert from raw format..When editing with photoshop or GIMP ,isn't your last product is a converted file.So how do you get good edited images?Is it also related to the quality of the computer programme for PP?Do you think I have to switch from DPP to a different one?

Thank you Ian,I will read the tutorials.So do you re-edit your image after converting to jpg.Is this the usual way?

[Manfred M]

This is strange indeed Binnur; while there are certainly advantages to using RAW files during the edit process, any final images that you see on the internet are virtually always jpegs. Depending on the type of editing, working on a RAW or jpeg can result in images that are indistinguishable. I have often successfully edited jpegs and gotten very nice quality output.

I don't know DPP at all, not being a Canon shooter. If it lets you save to TIFF format, these are 16-bit files, and should be a reasonable intermediate solution. Conversion to jpeg is usually the final step in most peoples work flow.

All that being said, there are far better editing tools out there, and I would suggest that you use either a commercial or open source one.

[shreds]

So many questions….!

I like to think of the RAW file as my original 'negative'. If I maintain that in the back up, everything else I do to it can be ultimately recreated. I cannot recreate the original.

So my workflow is to copy the original so that I have a working copy, with a new file name, but retaining a reference so that I know where it came from.

I am then free to do whatever I want with it including input, output and any other sharpening before creating a jpeg for uploading or emailing to a client, if that is what is required.

I think of the jpeg as the 'print' from the RAW digital 'negative' (although personally I don't go down the Adobe DNG route and work with the Nikon (NEF) RAW files. Nikon format files will be around long enough for me not to worry).

So I do all my work on the copy RAW file, before saving as a jpeg if that is what is required. So yes, it is the last part of the workflow.

I don't touch the jpeg once created, as this will degrade the image and add to the file size, strangely enough.

I don't think it matters which editing software you use, although some are more difficult to learn than others. So whilst I don't use DPP, I cannot see that as affecting the quality to any great extent. Some programmes have more bells and whistles but that just makes them more difficult to learn in the first place. I have used many different ones in my time, and whilst I can be critical and point out which ones I prefer, this is not relevant. We all have our favourites. Save your money and study DPP further. It should be more than adequate.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Manfred,unfortunatelly DPP only converts to jpg and it creates TIFF files just to transfer to photoshop,so if you don't have photoshop you can't have a TIFF file either..What would you recommend if I want to switch to another editing tool?

This is strange indeed Binnur; while there are certainly advantages to using RAW files during the edit process, any final images that you see on the internet are virtually always jpegs. Depending on the type of editing, working on a RAW or jpeg can result in images that are indistinguishable. I have often successfully edited jpegs and gotten very nice quality output.

I don't know DPP at all, not being a Canon shooter. If it lets you save to TIFF format, these are 16-bit files, and should be a reasonable intermediate solution. Conversion to jpeg is usually the final step in most peoples work flow.

All that being said, there are far better editing tools out there, and I would suggest that you use either a commercial or open source one.

[shreds]

As I said earlier there are many, but the industry standard tends to be Adobe Photoshop or Elements and there is so much support for these products you can't go too far wrong. Obviously the down side is the cost.

Open Source stuff like The GIMP offer good functionality without the price tag, but I would say the learning curve is slightly steeper. (Not that much though).

Others include Apple Aperture if you have a Mac computer, or Capture One/Media Pro, Adobe Lightroom, Nikon Capture NX2 and probably loads that I can't think of, off the top of my head.

[Donald]

Thank you Manfred,unfortunatelly DPP only converts to jpg and it creates TIFF files just to transfer to photoshop,so if you don't have photoshop you can't have a TIFF file either..What would you recommend if I want to switch to another editing tool?

Binnur

You give the impression that you should only create a TIFF file if you want to then continue editing in an Adobe product. e.g. Photoshop. That is not correct.

I have never used any Photoshop. But I did start my RAW processing 'career' using DPP.

I would save the processed RAW file as a TIFF and then open it in the GIMP. I would then work on it further editing before saving the finished file as JPEG. A TIFF can be used in many editing programmes, not only Photoshop.

[Manfred M]

Thank you Manfred,unfortunatelly DPP only converts to jpg and it creates TIFF files just to transfer to photoshop,so if you don't have photoshop you can't have a TIFF file either..What would you recommend if I want to switch to another editing tool?

There are a number of tools out there; the three Adobe products (Photoshop Elements, Lightroom and Photoshop) have the lion's share of the editing market; and they all have a decent RAW convertor. I would probably suggest you start with one of these products. Elements is a decent entry level product and as it supports layers, it is a more powerful tool than its name suggests.

A lot of people like Lightroom (I for one do not), as it does a decent job as some of the basic work you need to get an image looking good (it is based on the Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) engine), but has some serious limitations due to it's parameteric editing design (i.e. all edits have to be described by an equation). Photoshop is of course the most powerful of the tools, and the one I use. It is relatively expensive and has a very long learning curve.

There are also free options; with GIMP being the most powerful, but you have to use an external RAW converter if you plan to use RAW data.

[bnnrcn]

I tried it Donald,if I choose 'transfer to photoshop' ,DPP can't transfer because I don't have photoshop,If I choose 'convert and save' function,then I get a jpg file.I will try it again,in case I have missed something..

Binnur

You give the impression that you should only create a TIFF file if you want to then continue editing in an Adobe product. e.g. Photoshop. That is not correct.

I have never used any Photoshop. But I did start my RAW processing 'career' using DPP.

I would save the processed RAW file as a TIFF and then open it in the GIMP. I would then work on it further editing before saving the finished file as JPEG. A TIFF can be used in many editing programmes, not only Photoshop.

[bnnrcn]

Sorry about it Donald,I tried it again and it worked.It is my fault that I have used the default option which was jpg while converting.I did this very late last night and I must have lost concentration Thank you very much for warning.So after editing raw version if I convert to TIFF format,do I still have to convert it to jpg in order to upload CIC or e-mail somewhere?If I have to convert to jpg for the last step,won't the image quality get worse again because jpg format loses information.

I tried it Donald,if I choose 'transfer to photoshop' ,DPP can't transfer because I don't have photoshop,If I choose 'convert and save' function,then I get a jpg file.I will try it again,in case I have missed something..

[shreds]

Sure, any jpeg conversion will throw away detail, but in order to see it on most computer screens, that is the way you are going to have to go. The reason for using TIFFs is that they are 'lossless' and thereby preserve the detail, but they are only usually an intermediate part of the story. (Occasionally TIFFs are acceptable, for instance to some magazines and publishing houses or photo libraries in order to maintain quality, especially if they intend to print from the image).

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Ian,so I'm stuck with this JPG format in any way.In one of the tutorials I read that TIFF files are good for archiving..What I understand from this thread,I can store my good pictures in TIFF format,but I always have to convert them to JPG in order to upload somewhere and this means 'loss of information'.

Sure, any jpeg conversion will throw away detail, but in order to see it on most computer screens, that is the way you are going to have to go. The reason for using TIFFs is that they are 'lossless' and thereby preserve the detail, but they are only usually an intermediate part of the story. (Occasionally TIFFs are acceptable, for instance to some magazines and publishing houses or photo libraries in order to maintain quality, especially if they intend to print from the image).

[bnnrcn]

Thanks everybody for helping me about understanding that a jpg format has always less information and there is nothing much to do about it for the time being.Sometimes I might as well post process in jpg format instead of raw format if the situation lets me do it.

[Donald]

What I understand from this thread,I can store my good pictures in TIFF format,but I always have to convert them to JPG in order to upload somewhere and this means 'loss of information'.

Exactly.

For every picture that I think is worth processing to be the finished article, I have:

1. The original RAW file
2. A TIFF file
3. A downsized JPEG file for displaying on my website and/or on here.

And then as required for the purposes of printing, I can also make a full size JPEG from the TIFF file; i.e. not reducing the overall size.

[shreds]

Thanks everybody for helping me about understanding that a jpg format has always less information and there is nothing much to do about it for the time being.Sometimes I might as well post process in jpg format instead of raw format if the situation lets me do it.

Binnur, Nooooooooooo!

Always do the processing from the RAW/TIFF, otherwise you are starting off at a very low standard and getting lower. There is so much you can do and will see, in the larger RAW/TIFF file, that will create BETTER jpegs for you at the end of the processing.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Ian,I will certainly listen to your word I don't know very much about PP ,so as you say I will see.

Binnur, Nooooooooooo!

Always do the processing from the RAW/TIFF, otherwise you are starting off at a very low standard and getting lower. There is so much you can do and will see, in the larger RAW/TIFF file, that will create BETTER jpegs for you at the end of the processing.

[ajohnw]

You may have a silly type problem. Usually when a jpg is produced it's smaller than the original and needs to be sharpened a little bit after it has been resized and converted. You may and probably should find that DPP will allow you to reload the jpg and do just that.

I wouldn't point a beginner at the GIMP. Actually if the correct plugin is available it will open a raw file. It just starts up another program called Ufraw. That is similar to Adobe Raw. Many aspects of the GIMP are really aimed at some one who knows what they are doing.

Rawtherapee is free and a much better bet but it has rather a lot in it so don't expect to use all of it instantly. Read the manual concerning colour profiles before trying to do anything with it. It suggests where to obtain these from and how to install them for your camera.

A clue on how to start off may help. It has tabs that show the various facilities The first thing to do is to go to the 3rd one. The input profile is the camera profile. Select custom and brows to where ever you put them and select one. There may be 5. It's interesting to see what each do to your image. There after when ever you start the application up it will use the profile you have selected so this is a one off step unless you want to use another. Under input profile you will see working and output profiles. These should be set to sRGB/RTsRGB and may not be. What it uses by default here is set in preferences but to get at that Rawtherapee has to be started on it's own rather than right clicking an image etc. That brings up it's file browser which is where there is a button to set preferences. There is another option in this tab which may be of use if you load say jpg's, png's or tiff's from some one else and that is use embedded profile if possible. Just remember that is there. I reckon it should do this automatically really if none raw files are loaded.

Then comes using it. Back to the first tab. For a 1st step I would suggest using the Auto Levels button. This will automatically adjust all of the sliders down to Tone Curve 1. You can then mess around with them to see what they do. The manual should help. If auto levels doesn't look to good use the neutral button to reset it again and adjust yourself. Probably best to skip tone curves 1 and 2 for a while. Under that is shadows/Highlights which includes local contrast. When using these adjust the 1st slider for the desired effect and then the 2nd one to tune it up. Might be best to leave the rest on this tab for a while. Taking tone mapping for instance it can be used but will upset brightness so needs either lightness slider or perhaps even exposure compensation to be used. The other sliders may need the same adjustments here as well but often little is best.

Sharpening is in the next tab and other things as well that are probably best left alone for a while or see what the defaults do. Noise reduction is spectacular but as it has 6 sliders and options it's best to do some web searched and find some examples of it's use.

Some shots need the 5th tab using first to remove chromatic aberration if it's present. Usually bluish tinges on edges. There is an auto option but the manual sliders will generally do better. For this sort of thing, sharpening and others where fine detail is being altered there can be any number of small pre view windows that show a 100% resolution view as often the main view is at a reduced size. Just hover the mouse round the various icon on the screen and a pop up will tell you what each one does.

Wait for it. So the final jpg has been produced but the screen etc still shows the original image having had all of the processing carried out on it. It wont be reduced in size if specified in the 4th tab until it's actually saved so if some more sharpening is needed there is no way of knowing unless the new image is loaded. The reasons for this are a little complicated. I understand some Adobe products automatically sharpen by some amount they choose when reduced images are saved to get round the problem. There is an alternative though. One of the icons offers export to an external editor which would normally be the GIMP. Fortunately sharpening, dodging, burning, cloning out unwanted items and one or two other things that a shot may need are easy to do in the GIMP so this is not a bad way to work. The other way of course is to simply open the saved image from rawtherapee itself.

John
-

[bnnrcn]

Thank you very much for your detailed explanation John.

You may have a silly type problem. Usually when a jpg is produced it's smaller than the original and needs to be sharpened a little bit after it has been resized and converted. You may and probably should find that DPP will allow you to reload the jpg and do just that.

I wouldn't point a beginner at the GIMP. Actually if the correct plugin is available it will open a raw file. It just starts up another program called Ufraw. That is similar to Adobe Raw. Many aspects of the GIMP are really aimed at some one who knows what they are doing.

Rawtherapee is free and a much better bet but it has rather a lot in it so don't expect to use all of it instantly. Read the manual concerning colour profiles before trying to do anything with it. It suggests where to obtain these from and how to install them for your camera.

A clue on how to start off may help. It has tabs that show the various facilities The first thing to do is to go to the 3rd one. The input profile is the camera profile. Select custom and brows to where ever you put them and select one. There may be 5. It's interesting to see what each do to your image. There after when ever you start the application up it will use the profile you have selected so this is a one off step unless you want to use another. Under input profile you will see working and output profiles. These should be set to sRGB/RTsRGB and may not be. What it uses by default here is set in preferences but to get at that Rawtherapee has to be started on it's own rather than right clicking an image etc. That brings up it's file browser which is where there is a button to set preferences. There is another option in this tab which may be of use if you load say jpg's, png's or tiff's from some one else and that is use embedded profile if possible. Just remember that is there. I reckon it should do this automatically really if none raw files are loaded.

Then comes using it. Back to the first tab. For a 1st step I would suggest using the Auto Levels button. This will automatically adjust all of the sliders down to Tone Curve 1. You can then mess around with them to see what they do. The manual should help. If auto levels doesn't look to good use the neutral button to reset it again and adjust yourself. Probably best to skip tone curves 1 and 2 for a while. Under that is shadows/Highlights which includes local contrast. When using these adjust the 1st slider for the desired effect and then the 2nd one to tune it up. Might be best to leave the rest on this tab for a while. Taking tone mapping for instance it can be used but will upset brightness so needs either lightness slider or perhaps even exposure compensation to be used. The other sliders may need the same adjustments here as well but often little is best.

Sharpening is in the next tab and other things as well that are probably best left alone for a while or see what the defaults do. Noise reduction is spectacular but as it has 6 sliders and options it's best to do some web searched and find some examples of it's use.

Some shots need the 5th tab using first to remove chromatic aberration if it's present. Usually bluish tinges on edges. There is an auto option but the manual sliders will generally do better. For this sort of thing, sharpening and others where fine detail is being altered there can be any number of small pre view windows that show a 100% resolution view as often the main view is at a reduced size. Just hover the mouse round the various icon on the screen and a pop up will tell you what each one does.

Wait for it. So the final jpg has been produced but the screen etc still shows the original image having had all of the processing carried out on it. It wont be reduced in size if specified in the 4th tab until it's actually saved so if some more sharpening is needed there is no way of knowing unless the new image is loaded. The reasons for this are a little complicated. I understand some Adobe products automatically sharpen by some amount they choose when reduced images are saved to get round the problem. There is an alternative though. One of the icons offers export to an external editor which would normally be the GIMP. Fortunately sharpening, dodging, burning, cloning out unwanted items and one or two other things that a shot may need are easy to do in the GIMP so this is not a bad way to work. The other way of course is to simply open the saved image from rawtherapee itself.

John
-