RAW images

I'm new to the digital camera world. I have a Canon PowerShot Pro1. I have
read that it is important to take the images in RAW format and then transfer
them to TIFFs to get the best quality. All of my RAW images tend to look
blurred while my JPEGS at the same settings are clear as a bell. Am I
doing something wrong? Even the images that I initially take as JPEGS and
then immediately transform into RAW files turn out slightly blurred when I
view them in my computer. Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks! ...Dan

From: "Dan Gheno"

I'm new to the digital camera world. I have a Canon PowerShot Pro1. I have
read that it is important to take the images in RAW format and then transfer
them to TIFFs to get the best quality. All of my RAW images tend to look
blurred while my JPEGS at the same settings are clear as a bell. Am I
doing something wrong? Even the images that I initially take as JPEGS and
then immediately transform into RAW files turn out slightly blurred when I
view them in my computer.

The jpegs are created in-camera from RAW files ... they are getting sharpened
when converted to jpegs, either with a default setting or with something you
set on purpose ... sharpen the converted RAW files and they will also look
"clear as a bell".

From: "Dan Gheno"

I'm new to the digital camera world. I have a Canon PowerShot Pro1. I have
read that it is important to take the images in RAW format and then transfer
them to TIFFs to get the best quality. All of my RAW images tend to look
blurred while my JPEGS at the same settings are clear as a bell. Am I
doing something wrong? Even the images that I initially take as JPEGS and
then immediately transform into RAW files turn out slightly blurred when I
view them in my computer.

The jpegs are created in-camera from RAW files ... they are getting sharpened
when converted to jpegs, either with a default setting or with something you
set on purpose ... sharpen the converted RAW files and they will also look
"clear as a bell".

JPEGs are the finished product of your cameras computer editting pics
the way it thinks the image should look (i.e., sharpenning,
sensitivity, etc.), then compressing the image to save space. The
advantage to RAW format or TIFF/TIFs is TRUE resolution, and that if
part of the file becomes corrupted, the file can still be salvaged,
whereas in JPEG, 28-bits could represent any # of pixels in the image.
However, I've been known to speak from my butt from time to time, so
feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

JPEGs are the finished product of your cameras computer editting pics
the way it thinks the image should look (i.e., sharpenning,
sensitivity, etc.), then compressing the image to save space. The
advantage to RAW format or TIFF/TIFs is TRUE resolution, and that if
part of the file becomes corrupted, the file can still be salvaged,
whereas in JPEG, 28-bits could represent any # of pixels in the image.
However, I've been known to speak from my butt from time to time, so
feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

"Dan Gheno" writes:

them to TIFFs to get the best quality. All of my RAW images tend to look
blurred while my JPEGS at the same settings are clear as a bell. Am I
doing something wrong? Even the images that I initially take as JPEGS and

I think you'd get better guesses if you posted a couple of examples of JPG
and RAW files on the Web somewhere. (Oh, and told people the URL.)
--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email from this URL
http://www.cieux.com/ | http://www.civex.com/ is read daily.

Dan Gheno wrote:

I'm new to the digital camera world.
I have a Canon PowerShot Pro1.
I have read that it is important to take
the images in RAW format and then
transfer them to TIFFs to get the best
quality.

Not perhaps to get the best quality,
but to provide a basis for the most
versatility, and maybe the best quality
depending on your purpose.

RAW can be though of as straight output
from the sensor on your camera. Each
pixel laid down as a number in a grid.
(I know that's not entirely true, but it'll
do for a primer.)

You can take that raw output and
adjust brightness, contrast, sharpness,
white balance and so on to end up
with the finished picture.

That's what your camera does for you
when you choose JPEG as the output.
It also compresses the file.

So when you compare RAW, which
is unimproved sensor data, with JPEG,
which has been improved for viewing,
it's like comparing a pile of lumber
with a garage.

All of my RAW images tend
to look blurred while my JPEGS at the
same settings are clear as a bell.

That's because of the effects of
contrast, brightness and sharpening
adjustments.

Am I doing something wrong?

Nope. It's as it should be.

Even the images that I initially take
as JPEGS and then immediately transform
into RAW files turn out slightly blurred
when I view them in my computer.

Well, now that's a problem. I'm not sure
how you go from JPEG to RAW. Do you
mean to TIFF?

The purpose of starting with RAW output
is that you can do a heck of a lot with
RAW files. You can adjust things in them
in any number of ways to make them look
better, then save them as a JPEG to reduce
their size for sharing with friends and family.

But once you take JPEG from the camera,
you've lost the RAW data, and there's no
way to get it back. You have the garage
pre-built.

So the recommended path (workflow, it's
called) would be to take RAW from the
camera and save it on your hard drive.
Then make a copy and manipulate that
for white balance, color, brightness, contrast,
sharpness and whatever else you want to
play with. (Sharpness should be last.)
You can save as TIFF, which saves all
the data but doesn't compress, or use
JPEG, which compresses and loses
some data.

When you're done with your own manipulations,
the resulting file should look as good as
what comes as JPEG from the camera.

Now, that said, many cameras provide
pretty darn good looking JPEGs that
print up just fine at the drugstore, and if
that's all you need, then don't worry about it.

Thanks to everyone for the clear and thorough explanations. Everyone seems
to agree that the camera is doing some in-house manipulation of the images
when it converts them to JPEGs. I will try playing around with the RAW files
in my computer---- the camera came with a program to tweak the images.

As for the reconverting of the JPEGs to RAW..... According to my Cannon
PowerShot Pro1 manual (pg.55, 56), the camera is supposedly able to return
the JPEG image back into RAW if you command the camera to do so within 10
seconds of taking the image. I assume that the camera must be holding onto
both the RAW and the JPEG converted image for those 10 seconds. At least
that's what I'm assuming---- the manual never explains the how of the
process.

Thanks again for everyone's help.... Happy Holidays,
Dan
"Don Lathrop" wrote in message
...
Dan Gheno wrote:

I'm new to the digital camera world.
I have a Canon PowerShot Pro1.
I have read that it is important to take
the images in RAW format and then
transfer them to TIFFs to get the best
quality.

Not perhaps to get the best quality,
but to provide a basis for the most
versatility, and maybe the best quality
depending on your purpose.

RAW can be though of as straight output
from the sensor on your camera. Each
pixel laid down as a number in a grid.
(I know that's not entirely true, but it'll
do for a primer.)

You can take that raw output and
adjust brightness, contrast, sharpness,
white balance and so on to end up
with the finished picture.

That's what your camera does for you
when you choose JPEG as the output.
It also compresses the file.

So when you compare RAW, which
is unimproved sensor data, with JPEG,
which has been improved for viewing,
it's like comparing a pile of lumber
with a garage.

All of my RAW images tend
to look blurred while my JPEGS at the
same settings are clear as a bell.

That's because of the effects of
contrast, brightness and sharpening
adjustments.

Am I doing something wrong?

Nope. It's as it should be.

Even the images that I initially take
as JPEGS and then immediately transform
into RAW files turn out slightly blurred
when I view them in my computer.

Well, now that's a problem. I'm not sure
how you go from JPEG to RAW. Do you
mean to TIFF?

The purpose of starting with RAW output
is that you can do a heck of a lot with
RAW files. You can adjust things in them
in any number of ways to make them look
better, then save them as a JPEG to reduce
their size for sharing with friends and family.

But once you take JPEG from the camera,
you've lost the RAW data, and there's no
way to get it back. You have the garage
pre-built.

So the recommended path (workflow, it's
called) would be to take RAW from the
camera and save it on your hard drive.
Then make a copy and manipulate that
for white balance, color, brightness, contrast,
sharpness and whatever else you want to
play with. (Sharpness should be last.)
You can save as TIFF, which saves all
the data but doesn't compress, or use
JPEG, which compresses and loses
some data.

When you're done with your own manipulations,
the resulting file should look as good as
what comes as JPEG from the camera.

Now, that said, many cameras provide
pretty darn good looking JPEGs that
print up just fine at the drugstore, and if
that's all you need, then don't worry about it.

Dan Gheno wrote:

Thanks to everyone for the clear and thorough explanations. Everyone seems
to agree that the camera is doing some in-house manipulation of the images
when it converts them to JPEGs. I will try playing around with the RAW files
in my computer---- the camera came with a program to tweak the images.

As for the reconverting of the JPEGs to RAW..... According to my Cannon
PowerShot Pro1 manual (pg.55, 56), the camera is supposedly able to return
the JPEG image back into RAW if you command the camera to do so within 10
seconds of taking the image. I assume that the camera must be holding onto
both the RAW and the JPEG converted image for those 10 seconds. At least
that's what I'm assuming---- the manual never explains the how of the
process.


Ah, that rings a bell. I recall reading that also, in one of my Canon
manuals, but never gave a thought to actually using it. Could come in
handy, tho, so I will try to look it up.

--
John McWilliams

Dan Gheno wrote:

Thanks to everyone for the clear and thorough explanations. Everyone seems
to agree that the camera is doing some in-house manipulation of the images
when it converts them to JPEGs. I will try playing around with the RAW files
in my computer---- the camera came with a program to tweak the images.

As for the reconverting of the JPEGs to RAW..... According to my Cannon
PowerShot Pro1 manual (pg.55, 56), the camera is supposedly able to return
the JPEG image back into RAW if you command the camera to do so within 10
seconds of taking the image. I assume that the camera must be holding onto
both the RAW and the JPEG converted image for those 10 seconds. At least
that's what I'm assuming---- the manual never explains the how of the
process.


Ah, that rings a bell. I recall reading that also, in one of my Canon
manuals, but never gave a thought to actually using it. Could come in
handy, tho, so I will try to look it up.

--
John McWilliams