Those with large areas of continuous tone could see banding develop.īut having said this, the idea behind using JPEG images is that you don’t need to process them, or any processing would be minor. Whilst this hasn’t caused a noticeable problem with the test image, it could cause problems in some images. It’s quite probable that the internal working of today’s photo editing software is minimising any data damage when editing 8-bit images.Īfter editing both images by applying Curves, Saturation and Sharpening here is the side by side comparison. When you click the warning to refresh the data, the gaps often vanish. This is telling you that you’re displaying cached data. Today when you see gaps appear in the Photoshop histogram, you will probably see an information warning next to it. This problem certainly occurred in the past, but its possible technology has progressed. Indeed, when you edit an image in Photoshop, you will see gaps appearing in the histogram which is an example of possible editing damage. Over time this can become visible as artefacts in the image. The theory goes that when you edit an image, part of the image data is damaged or lost. JPEG files are 8-bit images where the RAW file is a 16-bit image. This has now become more of an urban myth that’s accepted as fact because it’s repeated so often. I think it’s fair to say that the detail argument doesn’t stand up to scrutiny today. I also optimised the settings for the image rather than use the same settings for both. In case your wondering, I sharpened each image individually using Photoshop Smart Sharpen. The lens is another important variable in the comparison as a poor lens could cause issues for JPEG processing.īoth images now look great and you can hardly distinguish between the two. Now let’s compare a more recent example captured with a Fuji X-T2 and a Fuji 16-55 lens. To address the noise problem, the software was often quite aggressive and did destroy fine detail, especially when shot at high ISO or where there were a lot of similar colours. At the time camera sensors were noisy and in-camera JPEG processing was poor, to say the least, compared to today’s standards. Now think back to the early days of digital photography. The result is a JPEG image file, and if your camera’s not set to save a RAW file as well, it discards the RAW data. It then converts this using the camera’s software to apply contrast, colour, sharpness and noise reduction and a few other things. When you capture an image in the JPEG format, your camera still captures the RAW data. JPEG Images Lack Detailīefore we look at an example it’s worth understanding where this criticism came from as it’s been around for a long time. Let’s examine both points in greater detail. JPEG images can’t withstand editing as well as RAW images can.Images shot in JPEG don’t have the same level of detail as a RAW image.When it comes to comparing the JPEG and RAW formats, you frequently hear two criticisms of in-camera JPEG images:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |