Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Converting RAW to jpg

  1. #1

    Default Converting RAW to jpg

    I have noticed when i used Lightroom 2 (ver 2.5) and export to jpg at maximum quality settings,file size is 10mb
    however,same photo edited in Photoshop CS4 (ver11) saved as jpeg at maximum setting is only 3+mb.

    Why is that so?does it mean my jpg from photoshop is of a lower quality?

  2. #2

    Default Re: Converting RAW to jpg

    When you choose Maximum in PS, is the Quality Level 10 or 12 ? Maximum in PS default is 10, but if you have previously shifted the slider to 12, it will stay at 12 unless you select another setting and reselect Maximum after that.

    Extreme Maximum for both application gives you lossless jpeg compression, means the quantization process is skipped. (never mind if you don't understand the part after the comma, it is technical)

    The last I checked, they gives very similar file size.

    Quote Originally Posted by sid8888 View Post
    I have noticed when i used Lightroom 2 (ver 2.5) and export to jpg at maximum quality settings,file size is 10mb
    however,same photo edited in Photoshop CS4 (ver11) saved as jpeg at maximum setting is only 3+mb.

    Why is that so?does it mean my jpg from photoshop is of a lower quality?
    D3S|N70-200|N24-70|N24-85|N50f1.4|N35f2|SB800|SB900|Yashica GS|S95
    www.flickr.com/photos/davidktw

  3. #3
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,053

    Default Re: Converting RAW to jpg

    On a side note: LR recent version is 3.4.1 with many improvements compared to version 2.
    EOS

  4. #4

    Default Re: Converting RAW to jpg

    Nope, most recent version is 3.5

  5. #5

    Default Re: Converting RAW to jpg

    I did a quick test, using same RAW file without any editing, convert to jpg, LR gave me a 7.1mb file while PS created a 6.8mb file....guess its about the same.
    I think the reason why the other time around there was such a big difference is cos I used lens blur filter , and painted over quite a large portion of the picture, thus resulting in significant loss of details?

    In PS there are 3 formats to choose from when saving as jpg, I usually use the default(Baseline standard). Will there be any difference if i chose either of the other 2 options?

  6. #6
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,053

    Default Re: Converting RAW to jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by cutecdo View Post
    Nope, most recent version is 3.5
    Released the moment you wrote the posting?
    EOS

  7. #7
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,053

    Default Re: Converting RAW to jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by sid8888 View Post
    In PS there are 3 formats to choose from when saving as jpg, I usually use the default(Baseline standard). Will there be any difference if i chose either of the other 2 options?
    What are the results if you try out?
    EOS

  8. #8

    Default Re: Converting RAW to jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by Octarine View Post
    Released the moment you wrote the posting?
    I think it was released on thursday

  9. #9

    Default Re: Converting RAW to jpg

    It's 3.5 now
    Quote Originally Posted by Octarine View Post
    Released the moment you wrote the posting?
    D3S|N70-200|N24-70|N24-85|N50f1.4|N35f2|SB800|SB900|Yashica GS|S95
    www.flickr.com/photos/davidktw

  10. #10

    Default Re: Converting RAW to jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by sid8888 View Post
    I did a quick test, using same RAW file without any editing, convert to jpg, LR gave me a 7.1mb file while PS created a 6.8mb file....guess its about the same.
    I think the reason why the other time around there was such a big difference is cos I used lens blur filter , and painted over quite a large portion of the picture, thus resulting in significant loss of details?
    You have not mentioned previously the 2 images are of different contents. Of course it's going to be different. JPEG compression algorithm are inclined towards gradual toned images and will produce smaller files for such kind of images. Sharp edged images will either yield a worse compression ratio, or obvious JPEG artifacts if the compression quality is low.

    In PS there are 3 formats to choose from when saving as jpg, I usually use the default(Baseline standard). Will there be any difference if i chose either of the other 2 options?
    Both baseline and optimized form will not have effect to your image quality except a slightly smaller file size for the latter. Baseline will be the most compatible

    For further reading material, feel free to fall asleep from this article http://www.impulseadventure.com/phot...ized-jpeg.html, should you are not in the IT faculty
    Last edited by David Kwok; 1st October 2011 at 01:32 AM.
    D3S|N70-200|N24-70|N24-85|N50f1.4|N35f2|SB800|SB900|Yashica GS|S95
    www.flickr.com/photos/davidktw

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •