Raw with embedded JPEG - enlighten me please

[CeeCee]

Hi guys

Can you give me at straight answer on this :

I always shoot in RAW and i use Capture One DSLR to process these files, but i came to wonder whether the RAW files are different when i use either a small or a large embedded JPEG in the RAW file.

I´m not sure i place this question right, here´s another go : Does it matter (at all) if you choose to shoot RAW with small JPEG compared to RAW with Large JPEG.

Wouldn´t i go for RAW with small, since i only use the RAW, and convert it either to TIFF or JPEG in the Capture One ?????

Anyone ?

[CeeCee]

In addition :

I have 2 x 512 Mb CF cards, and with large JPEG embedded i can shoot approx. 60 exposures and with small JPEG embedded i have 80 exposures to fool around with.

So if there is no reason to choose Large i would rather have the 80 exposures than the 60 - since i convert lateron to JPEG or maybe TIFF

Thanks in advance

[Morden]

Hi guys

Can you give me at straight answer on this :

I always shoot in RAW and i use Capture One DSLR to process these files, but i came to wonder whether the RAW files are different when i use either a small or a large embedded JPEG in the RAW file.

I´m not sure i place this question right, here´s another go : Does it matter (at all) if you choose to shoot RAW with small JPEG compared to RAW with Large JPEG.

Wouldn´t i go for RAW with small, since i only use the RAW, and convert it either to TIFF or JPEG in the Capture One ?????

Anyone ?
As far as I know, the size and quality of the embedded JPEG have absolutely no impact whatsover on the raw data. The JPEG is little more than a "quick preview" version of the image. I only ever use the lowest quality embedded JPEGs possible.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Neil is spot on,.

The embedded jpeg size has NO influence on the RAW data..

I too use only the smallest jpg with highest compression as the embedded jpeg,. and I really have no use for that either.

[Morden]

So if there is no reason to choose Large i would rather have the 80 exposures than the 60
Precisely the reason why I myself choose the smallest embedded JPEG possible!

[defordphoto]

Neil is spot on,.
I too use only the smallest jpg with highest compression as the embedded jpeg,. and I really have no use for that either.

Only to clarify and not confuse; There is no selection to choose the JPEG compression rate within your camera. That is pre-determined.

[CeeCee]

Not true.

You can alter the embedded JPEG in 2 steps. In the menu 08 you can choose RAW with Small JPEG compressed (Setting 0) and less compressed (Setting 1)

C

[mjordan]

I shoot raw almost all the time and though I can't say if it has asolutely no impact or not, I can say that I do use the embedded jpeg.

I use the embedded jpeg for several things. One, I use it to create the web gallery of my shots. It's a lot faster to use them than it is to convert all my raw images and run it through my gallery maker. I then only have to convert those I want to print for a customer or do something with.

Two, I use them to send via e-mail if I need to before I've converted the raw files.

Three, I use the embedded images to put on the CD that I send in to the copyright office to copyright all my images. So even if I never do anything with the raw images, I don't have to convert them just to create jpges to burn to CD and send in to copyright them. This saves a lot of time and disk space.

Mike

[CyberDyneSystems]

Neil is spot on,.
I too use only the smallest jpg with highest compression as the embedded jpeg,. and I really have no use for that either.

Only to clarify and not confuse; There is no selection to choose the JPEG compression rate within your camera. That is pre-determined.

Only to clarify;

I have WAY more posts than RFM so there fore I am right! :?

Okay,. thats not the the real clarfication...

Canon sold Jim the only 10D that can not adjust the compression of the embedded jpeg,. so he thinks he's right... :roll:

[CyberDyneSystems]

Three, I use the embedded images to put on the CD that I send in to the copyright office to copyright all my images. So even if I never do anything with the raw images, I don't have to convert them just to create jpges to burn to CD and send in to copyright them. This saves a lot of time and disk space.

Mike

Mike,. tell us more about copyrighting images?

I used to use the embedded jpegs myself... there are many practical reasons,. and Mike has listed some good ones.

I used to extract them and do all my browsing to see which were keepers etc.. using the jpegs. (my software was slow with RAW...)

[mjordan]

Hmm, I posted a big reply about copyrighting images this afternoon but I see it's not here. I guess I didn't save it right or something. I'll repost it in just a bit.

Mike

[defordphoto]

Neil is spot on,.
I too use only the smallest jpg with highest compression as the embedded jpeg,. and I really have no use for that either.

Only to clarify and not confuse; There is no selection to choose the JPEG compression rate within your camera. That is pre-determined.

Only to clarify;

I have WAY more posts than RFM so there fore I am right! :?

Okay,. thats not the the real clarfication...

Canon sold Jim the only 10D that can not adjust the compression of the embedded jpeg,. so he thinks he's right... :roll:

Good grief. Get freaking picky. I made a technical mistake. And I still don't consider that true selectable compression rates. You choose JPEG size and then fine or not fine.

[mjordan]

Three, I use the embedded images to put on the CD that I send in to the copyright office to copyright all my images. So even if I never do anything with the raw images, I don't have to convert them just to create jpges to burn to CD and send in to copyright them. This saves a lot of time and disk space.

Mike

Mike,. tell us more about copyrighting images?

I used to use the embedded jpegs myself... there are many practical reasons,. and Mike has listed some good ones.

I used to extract them and do all my browsing to see which were keepers etc.. using the jpegs. (my software was slow with RAW...)

Ok, let me try this again.

I register all of my images with the copyright office once every 3 months or right after I do a big event session and I have images that I know a lot of people are going to be viewing from my web site. I started doing this Jan 2003 after a woman in Virginia took one of my images and used it in her large color ad in a national magazine. This was about as clear a case of what the lawyer called "copyright infringement for profit" that there was, but I was unable to sue her. Not because I didn't have a legal right to, but because she is worth millions, owns a art gallery in Virginia (and should have known better) and has at least one IP lawyer on retainer. So she could drag it out, running up my lawyer bill as long as possible and there was no gurentee that I would be awarded enough to cover the cost of sueing her. During all of this, I found out a lot about copyright that I was either wrong about or didn't understand. I knew I was protected by copyright law, but I didn't know that you only have 90 days to register your images after they are published (publishing means selling, renting, leasing or having someone do this for you... putting them on your web site and showing them to the public does not mean they are published though). You can register them anytime if they are not published, but the sooner the better. I also found out, that even though the image she took was not published, registering after a infringement does not give you the special protection for that incidence. And this special protection is the key and almost the whole reason to register.

If your image is registered and someone infringes on you and you take them to court and win, not only do you win the judgement against them but they get to pay for all court and legal fees... yours and theirs. This is why lawyers like taking on cases like this and why the other side wants to settle before it gets to court. Had my image been registered, either of the two lawyers I talked to would have been on her faster than one of us on a legitamate $1500 Canon 1Ds. :D

So I burn jpegs of all my images (even the bad ones) to CD, fill out the VA form and send it in every 3 months (the 90 day after publishing rule, even if I haven't published them) or if I shoot a large event. You can put any number of images on a CD as long as they are all the same, unpublished or published. And it only costs $30. It takes about 15 minutes to fill out the VA form (Visual Arts) and they even have a VA Short Form if it's a simple registration. Send it all back to Wash. D.C. to the Library of Congress with dilivery confirmation (no need for return receipt) as your copyright registration starts the day (or day after) they receive it. It might take 6 months to get the certificate of registration, but you are covered from the day they get it.

So I register everything now and hope that another rich person steals one or more of my images (and I catch them) so I can retire. :D

If you want to read more about copyright, here is the web site for them:

http://www.copyright.gov/

I hope this helps.

Mike

[defordphoto]

Interesting. Good to know, Mike.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Thanks a lot Mike, that is very good to know.

Jim,. I was kidding! :oops: :(

[defordphoto]

Thanks a lot Mike, that is very good to know.

Jim,. I was kidding! :oops: :(

Watch where you put your rolling eyes there buddy! :) That didn't look like kidding...

Anyway, I didn't know that about the copyright laws. That's important for us all to remember!