RAW + JPEG shows exposure difference - confused!

[JeffreyG]

I've shot RAW with my XT ever since I got it and I've handled the conversion with DPP (WB fix), RSE (batch) and Elements 5.0 (layers work, curves) according to my needs.

On a recent trip I figured I'd come home with 1000 shots and so I shot everything in RAW + JPEG to cut my post processing. I figured anything where I nailed the WB and exposure I would just use the JPEG's. My understanding is that the camera simply increases contrast, saturation and sharpening as you set it up when it saves the JPEGs.

So the weird thing was that on some of the shots, especially in bright sun, the JPEGs looked to be 1/2 to 1 stop more exposed than the RAW. There were some even where preserved hightlights in the RAW were gone an unrecoverable in the JPEG.

I opened everthing using Elements 5.0. What is going on here? Can the camera adjust the exposure when it saves the JPEG? Is Elements making some adjustments when opening the file? If so, how did Elements blow out highlights that exist in the RAW.

I'm confused. About the only thing I think I've learned is not to shoot in JPEG only mode.

[Tel]

It may be that a contrast curve will make some of the mid-tones to highlights lighter. How do their histograms compare? I wouldn't expect there to be a difference where they start of finish.

[PacAce]

Your camera will process the JPG files the way you have your picture style parameters set. If the contrast is set too high, then it could very easily cause the highlight to get blown. The raw files, however, do not have the camera picture style parameters applied to them unless you are using DPP or Image/ZoomBrowser to process them with the default settings. Since you were using Elements, what you see in the raw preview will not necessarily look like the JPEG files coming out of the camera.

[davidcrebelxt]

You're seeing one of the benefits of shooting RAW... recoverable highlights... that you otherwise would assume to be gone forever with Jpeg since it throws information away when its processed.

(I still shoot RAW+jpeg myself, however, since jpeg is sometimes all I need.)

[In2Photos]

By default ACR (the RAW engine in Elements) uses Auto settings which will "correct" the shot. You need to turn those off. You can do it manually for each shot by pressing CTRL + U or setup your default settings with this settings off.

[Curtis N]

I opened everthing using Elements 5.0.Autocorrect is probably the cause, as Mike says. Try opening both files in DPP and see what you get. Theoretically they should be the same.

[Tee Why]

The RAW shots will not have the parameter settings that the JPEG will have. Parameter 2 is neutral without any processing, parameter 1 has some saturation, contrast, and sharpness added for more pop though.

I'd doubt that this would lead to a 1/2 stop increase in exposure though. I suspect that you have the default auto exposure correction left on in PS. I hear you have to turn it off or it auto exposes everything as you upload.

[PacAce]

By default ACR (the RAW engine in Elements) uses Auto settings which will "correct" the shot. You need to turn those off. You can do it manually for each shot by pressing CTRL + U or setup your default settings with this settings off.

Autocorrect is probably the cause, as Mike says. Try opening both files in DPP and see what you get. Theoretically they should be the same.

But the OP was complaining that the RAW images look good while the JPEG files shot at the same time looked overexposed. So he wanted to know why that is.

[In2Photos]

But the OP was complaining that the RAW images look good while the JPEG files shot at the same time looked overexposed. So he wanted to know why that is.
Right, so the RAW is being corrected by ACR to be fixed which shows the difference. If he turns it off the difference might be gone. He didn't say that he wanted the shots to be correct, he asked why they would differ.

[PacAce]

Right, so the RAW is being corrected by ACR to be fixed which shows the difference. If he turns it off the difference might be gone. He didn't say that he wanted the shots to be correct, he asked why they would differ.

I guess the point I was getting at is that his out-of-the-camera JPEG files seemed to be overexposed. I can't think of anyway ACR would make a raw image look overexposed, if it wasn't that way in the first place, unless maybe if the Auto were turned on. Now, if we were talking about doing the conversion with DPP or Image/ZoomBrowser, then I might agree with your since those programs will, be default, process the image similarly to how the camera would.

[Bill Boehme]

My understanding of the auto correct function is that Adobe has created profiles for each model camera that ACR supports and the purpose of these profiles is to "normalize" the results for your camera model so that it will now emulate an ideal camera without inherent biases (please let me know if my understanding of this is incorrect). I don't believe that this is the same thing as the "Auto" function on the Basic tab of the ACR menu which adjusts Exposure, Recovery, Fill Light, Blacks, Brightness, and Contrast. So, which of these are we talking about?

[In2Photos]

I guess the point I was getting at is that his out-of-the-camera JPEG files seemed to be overexposed. I can't think of anyway ACR would make a raw image look overexposed, if it wasn't that way in the first place, unless maybe if the Auto were turned on. Now, if we were talking about doing the conversion with DPP or Image/ZoomBrowser, then I might agree with your since those programs will, be default, process the image similarly to how the camera would.
Didn't I say that the Auto settings would be on? :confused:
By default ACR (the RAW engine in Elements) uses Auto settings which will "correct" the shot. You need to turn those off. You can do it manually for each shot by pressing CTRL + U or setup your default settings with this settings off.

[In2Photos]

My understanding of the auto correct function is that Adobe has created profiles for each model camera that ACR supports and the purpose of these profiles is to "normalize" the results for your camera model so that it will now emulate an ideal camera without inherent biases (please let me know if my understanding of this is incorrect). I don't believe that this is the same thing as the "Auto" function on the Basic tab of the ACR menu which adjusts Exposure, Recovery, Fill Light, Blacks, Brightness, and Contrast. So, which of these are we talking about?
I am talking about the checkboxes being turned on for the basic tab for the above in bold (although recovery and fill light might not be available on his version, not sure).

[PacAce]

Didn't I say that the Auto settings would be on? :confused:

Yes you did but the OP said that the raw image was OK, not over-exposed like the JPEG. Maybe we're just going around in circles here. :lol: :)

[In2Photos]

Yes you did but the OP said that the raw image was OK, not over-exposed like the JPEG. Maybe we're just going around in circles here. :lol: :)
Maybe? Nope! We definitely are. :lol:

The Auto settings in ACR are designed to fix a photo whether it is underexposed or overexposed. So here is my thoughts written out a little more.

With the Auto settings ON the RAW file is fine. But, with the Auto settings OFF the RAW image would be overexposed just like the JPEG.

So now that we have figured out what caused the RAW file to appear different then the JPEG that question is answered. Now we can fix the shots, either with the Auto settings or each one manually.

Is that any better? Or are we still circling? :lol:

[Bill Boehme]

...... are we still circling? :lol:

I think that I have quit circling and come home to my buzzard roost.;)

Thanks for the explanations!

[PacAce]

Maybe? Nope! We definitely are. :lol:

The Auto settings in ACR are designed to fix a photo whether it is underexposed or overexposed. So here is my thoughts written out a little more.

With the Auto settings ON the RAW file is fine. But, with the Auto settings OFF the RAW image would be overexposed just like the JPEG.

So now that we have figured out what caused the RAW file to appear different then the JPEG that question is answered. Now we can fix the shots, either with the Auto settings or each one manually.

Is that any better? Or are we still circling? :lol:
OK, now I understand where you're coming from. And now that I do, I might consider that you might be on to something if not for the statement the OP made about the raw image not having the highlights blown.



...So the weird thing was that on some of the shots, especially in bright sun, the JPEGs looked to be 1/2 to 1 stop more exposed than the RAW. There were some even where preserved hightlights in the RAW were gone an unrecoverable in the JPEG.

I opened everthing using Elements 5.0. What is going on here? Can the camera adjust the exposure when it saves the JPEG? Is Elements making some adjustments when opening the file? If so, how did Elements blow out highlights that exist in the RAW.

I'm confused. About the only thing I think I've learned is not to shoot in JPEG only mode.

If the original raw were in fact overexposed with the highlights blown, "fixing" the exposure via the ACR AUTO function would not bring back the lost highlight details.

So, I still contend that the reason the OP is seeing a difference between the raw image and the out-of-camera JPEG image is because of the processing done by the camera on the JPEG image using the picture-style parameter settings in the camera.

[In2Photos]

OK, now I understand where you're coming from.

Yeah! :D
And now that I do, I might consider that you might be on to something if not for the statement the OP made about the raw image not having the highlights blown.

Oh no! :cry:

If the original raw were in fact overexposed with the highlights blown, "fixing" the exposure via the ACR AUTO function would not bring back the lost highlight details.

So, I still contend that the reason the OP is seeing a difference between the raw image and the out-of-camera JPEG image is because of the processing done by the camera on the JPEG image using the picture-style parameter settings in the camera.
Doesn't this depend on how far the highlights are gone? I don't shoot JPEG but I know I can recover quite a bit in RAW. I might have to do some measurebating tonight.

Also you keep mentioning picture styles but the 350D/XT does not have that capabilities in camera.

[Curtis N]

If the original raw were in fact overexposed with the highlights blown, "fixing" the exposure via the ACR AUTO function would not bring back the lost highlight details.If the camera parameters were set to add contrast, the JPEG file very well could have blown highlights that were recoverable in the RAW file. I often see "blinkies" on my LCD indicating blown highlights and later find the RAW file perfectly useable.

It's one of the reasons I shoot RAW. :D

[PacAce]

Yeah! :D
Oh no! :cry:

Doesn't this depend on how far the highlights are gone? I don't shoot JPEG but I know I can recover quite a bit in RAW. I might have to do some measurebating tonight.

Also you keep mentioning picture styles but the 350D/XT does not have that capabilities in camera.

If the camera parameters were set to add contrast, the JPEG file very well could have blown highlights that were recoverable in the RAW file. I often see "blinkies" on my LCD indicating blown highlights and later find the RAW file perfectly useable.

It's one of the reasons I shoot RAW. :D

OK, sorry about the "picture style" thing. I though the XT had it. In that case, replace that with "processing parameters" then. :)

Re raw not having blown highlights and the JPEG having it, I agree 100% with what both of you are saying. And what Curtis said in his last post is exactly what I'm talking about. The reason the JPEG has a blown highlight while the raw doesn't is because of the in-camera processing done on the JPEG file. Whether you turned the ACR AUTO on or off would not make a difference. The raw would still have unblown details and the JPEG would, which is what the OP was seeing. Now, do you see what I was getting at? :D

[Curtis N]

do you see what I was getting at?Yes. Basically, Mike and I were right all along. :D

Honestly, I'm too tired to go back and try to figure out who got confused when. But I do hope the OP understands the answer to his original question.

[Bill Boehme]

Yes. Basically, Mike and I were right all along. :D

Honestly, I'm too tired to go back and try to figure out who got confused when. But I do hope the OP understands the answer to his original question.

I got confused trying to figure out who was confused. :confused:

According to the late Bruce Fraser, coauthor of Real World Photoshop, the highlight recovery function in ACR can "recover" up to one stop of blown highlights in some situations, but more typically about 1/3 stop. However, we should not take the term "recover" too literally -- what it really means is that one or sometimes two of the primary RGB colors is in "soft" saturation (the exposure response is no longer linear for that color) and therefore, the recovery is distorted in color fidelity. Because the recovered data has a very low density value on the print, this distortion is not particularly noticeable as long as it is kept to a judicious minimum.

[tzalman]

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17706&st=60
Posts number 61 and 65

[In2Photos]

OK, sorry about the "picture style" thing. I though the XT had it. In that case, replace that with "processing parameters" then. :)

Re raw not having blown highlights and the JPEG having it, I agree 100% with what both of you are saying. And what Curtis said in his last post is exactly what I'm talking about. The reason the JPEG has a blown highlight while the raw doesn't is because of the in-camera processing done on the JPEG file. Whether you turned the ACR AUTO on or off would not make a difference. The raw would still have unblown details and the JPEG would, which is what the OP was seeing. Now, do you see what I was getting at? :D
I do. Basically you think that the in-camera processing is causing the blown highlights and overexposed look. And I believe that the AUTO function in ACR is fixing the blown highlights and overexposed look. It might even be a combination of the two theories. ;)

But I guess the JPEG would have to be heavily processed to add that much to the highlights, would it not. A simple +1 contrast and saturation, and a little sharpening wouldn't send it that far over the top would it? (BTW I am really asking these questions as I don't shoot JPEG).

[JeffreyG]

I'm back....sorry I was gone so long but I had in fact stopped in to read a few times and try some things.

I think the main driver for my issue was the contrast adjustment in the camera. The highlights got brighter and this looked like more exposure to me. The clincher is that the pics that seemed to be brightened the most were the ones that had a larger brightly lit area. I had never paid any mind to the parameters before since I was shooting RAW so I didn't realize how powerful those sliders are to JPEGS.

Also, I opened the files in DPP and they did look more similar to each other....so Elements is doing something to either the CS2 or the JPEG. I'm going to experiment more to figure out what is going on there.

I'm still interested in being able to shoot JPEGS. I'll still shoot RAW for most things and especially critical stuff...but sometimes I just want a few snaps.

Thanks.

[René Damkot]

Also, I opened the files in DPP and they did look more similar to each other....so Elements is doing something to either the CS2 or the JPEG. I'm going to experiment more to figure out what is going on there.

How is your color management set up?
Have a read in the link from my sig for the settings for PSCS2 (I don't know Elements) and DPP...

[PacAce]

I'm back....sorry I was gone so long but I had in fact stopped in to read a few times and try some things.

I think the main driver for my issue was the contrast adjustment in the camera. The highlights got brighter and this looked like more exposure to me. The clincher is that the pics that seemed to be brightened the most were the ones that had a larger brightly lit area. I had never paid any mind to the parameters before since I was shooting RAW so I didn't realize how powerful those sliders are to JPEGS.

Also, I opened the files in DPP and they did look more similar to each other....so Elements is doing something to either the CS2 or the JPEG. I'm going to experiment more to figure out what is going on there.

I'm still interested in being able to shoot JPEGS. I'll still shoot RAW for most things and especially critical stuff...but sometimes I just want a few snaps.

Thanks.

It may very well be the Elements is doing something to the pictures but I also wanted to point out that DPP will, by default, apply the same parameters to the raw for conversion as the camera did for the JPEG. So, if you really want to see if theres a difference between the raw and the JPEG, you should set the DPP parameters to all be at the lowest settings.

[PacAce]

I'm back....sorry I was gone so long but I had in fact stopped in to read a few times and try some things.

I think the main driver for my issue was the contrast adjustment in the camera. The highlights got brighter and this looked like more exposure to me. The clincher is that the pics that seemed to be brightened the most were the ones that had a larger brightly lit area. I had never paid any mind to the parameters before since I was shooting RAW so I didn't realize how powerful those sliders are to JPEGS.

Also, I opened the files in DPP and they did look more similar to each other....so Elements is doing something to either the CS2 or the JPEG. I'm going to experiment more to figure out what is going on there.

I'm still interested in being able to shoot JPEGS. I'll still shoot RAW for most things and especially critical stuff...but sometimes I just want a few snaps.

Thanks.

It may very well be the Elements is doing something to the pictures but I just wanted to point out that DPP will, by default, apply the same parameters to the raw for conversion as the camera did for the JPEG and that's why they would look the same. So, if you really want to see if theres a difference between the raw and the JPEG, you should set the DPP parameters to all be at the lowest settings which is where ACR starts out at before it does it's thing to the images based on how you have ACR set up.