Dng & Jpeg

[bourgogneboy]

Although I have had my M8 for some months, I am still not familiar with digital photography as I have not had much time to learn more about it.

I have set my M8 to take both a DNG and a JPEG image at the same time. I import my shots into Lightroom. I have recently discovered that the JPEG image of the same shots feel warmer than the DNG image and I do not seem to be able to recreate the same feel in the DNG image using Lightroom. For example, I took some shots of my wife (who is very tan) and daughter and in the JPEG images, my wife's tan shows up as being very rich (which I like) but in the DNG image, it's less rich. In fact, the histograms of the 2 images are very different. And try as I might, I do not seem to be able to recreate the same effect in the DNG image. Can some one please explain all this and how I can use Lightroom to recreate the same effect from the DNG images?

I am particularly interested to know the answers to the above because I note that many of you who post here say that you shoot only in RAW (which I suppose means DNG?). I am just thinking that if I had shot the same images in DNG only, I would never have known that the image could look as nice as it does in the JPEG version.

Please forgive my ignorance.

[photomoof]

The Leica Jpg is just a processed version of the DNG. You may not be able to duplicate it in Lightroom, but may need photoshop to exactly duplicate the color results.

The important point however is that it can be done, the DNG is enough. However if you like the results of the built in Jpg processor, it is not slowing things down much to shoot it at the same time. Especially while you are learning to process DNG files it will be handy as a reference.

Later you can just shoot DNG alone.

[sepiareverb]

I too like the color of the B&W jpeg that the M8 spits out.
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=863915#post863915

[arnulf]

Like photomoof says: If you like the jpegs, keep shooting both. Don't shoot just jpeg! They can be ok, but the day you need to change the white balance, levels, exposure and stuff like that, the result really is a lot better changing the raws. A LOT more flexible!

[bourgogneboy]

Thank you all for your very helpful advice. I will continue to shoot in both DNG and Jpeg.

Photomoof, you said that I may not be able to duplicate the results in Lightroom but may be able to do it in Photoshop. Forgive my ignorance but isn't Lightroom already Photoshop (it's called Adobe Photoshop Lightroom)? If it's not, then what would I need?

[jaapv]

Ideally CS3, but that is expensive and a steep learning curve. Photoshop Elements 6 is the more "classical" stripped down version.
Lightroom uses for a large part the same software engine, but includes a different browser/archive and has a different user interface.

[bourgogneboy]

Thank you.

[willie_901]

I would wager a great deal of $$$ that Lightroom can create a virtual copy of your RAW DNG that will look very similar to the jpeg. Lightroom's entire purpose is to turn RAW images into optimized photographs. Lightroom does not have layers so you can not add or remove objects from an image (or do many other digital manipulations). Photoshop CSn is extremely versatile and powerful. Most people suffer a rather steep learning curve to take advantage of everything it can do. If you enjoy learning complex software and want to create highly manipulated images from you DNG photographs, then Photoshop CSn is the way to go. If you just want to adjust color temperature, contrast, saturation, and crop your DNGs, then Lightroom could be your best choice.

[photomoof]

Ideally CS3, but that is expensive and a steep learning curve. Photoshop Elements 6 is the more "classical" stripped down version.
Lightroom uses for a large part the same software engine, but includes a different browser/archive and has a different user interface.

They share the same Raw engine, and I think willie_901 might be right. I have just never taken enough photos to need Lightroom, but need the web and publishing features of Photoshop.

[Jim Evidon]

bourgogneboy,

I have CS3 and so I can really see the difference between the DNG raw and the jpg's on the same shot. The DNG is a raw format that contains no artifacts like jpgs, but as you noted, the color is flat and not pumped up. Raw format is like the original negative in film. You have the raw image and everything else is done in the darkroom, or in this case the computer. The jpg's on the other hand are already enhanced, but full of artifacts and digital noise.

In finally arriving at a satisfactory custom setting on the M8 (EV -3), I ran some test shots shooting DNG and jpg fine. The most telling shot was in my house where I captured a clock table in a fairly darkcorner next to the doorway of a brightly lit room. In photoshopCS3, the shadow detail of the jpg was pretty much blocked up and attempts to bring out the shadow detail resulted in significant noise, and I was shooting at ISO160, the least noisiest setting. By contrast, the DNG RAW image subjected to the same process in photoshop remained creamy smooth and noiseless. You can always punch up the color in a RAW image, but you can never get rid of the noise in a jpg; only mask it with plug-ins.

The bottom line is that if all you are interested in is a snapshot and smaller prints under 8x10, jpg is fine. But for more serious photography, shoot RAW (DNG).

Jim Evidon

[charjohncarter]

Eight months isn't long enough to learn how to operate a Digital Camera.