Lightroom RAW/JPG

Hello,

After reading all the positive reviews on Lightroom I decided to download the trial program and try it. Wow, what a program! I think I'm hooked!

Anyway, up until a couple of days ago, I had been using the Canon Photo Utility to import my RAW+JPG pictures from my 30D. The Canon utility imports the CR2 and JPG of each photo with the same file name but different extension: IMG001.CR2 and IMG001.JPG.

However, when I use the Lightroom import from my memory card, both the file name and the extension for the same picture are different: IMG001.CR2 and IMG002.JPG.

On the surface this appears to be no big deal, but with DPP imported images, only the RAW file will show in Lightroom for editing, the matching JPG will not show.

However, for Lightroom imported files where the corresponding JPG has a different file name, both the RAW and JPG files are available for editing.

Is there any advantage to (batch) renaming my DPP imported files so that each RAW and JPG for the same image have their images available for editing in Lightroom?

Would a batch rename of my files mess up my EXIF data in any way? I haven't done any serious editing with Lightroom yet, I've just been playing about with it. If I'm going to use Lightroom in the future I should perhaps rename my files now.

Thanks,
~Dom

P.S. Selecting "Treat JPEG files next to RAW files as separate photos" in the preferences only works for Lightroom imported files.

Hi All,

I just found that if you select a folder in LR's Navigator, and then click on Synchronize, all the JPG's that belong to a CR2 file imported with DPP will show up in LR for editing! No nenaming is required!

~Dom

Generally, editing the jpg instead of the RAW file, will not give you the same quality file.
Auto White Balance - works really well Actually, it doesn't and there are some examples on page 2, post #58, that illustrate easily seen information loss in a web jpeg derived from a RAW file & one shot in the camera. Those differences will look even bigger in a hi-res print.

I would agree with photos guy about RAW files giving better results.

Personally I would not bother to import the JPEG files into lightroom because they make your catalog bigger and lightroom has to spend more time creating previews etc...

The difference may not be that obvious at first but if you spend a while working with RAW files and tweaking them, you will start to notice the difference.

Mr. Fixitx

I, on the other hand, like having the jpeg files there...

1) from a DAM aspect, I want to keep track of ALL my images.

2) Because of the poor color conversion and color shifts ACR applies to my .CR2 files. The jpeg can at least clue me in on whether something really should have been Red or Orange, OR Purple or Red... also nice for quick prints of images without having to tweak my RAW image and correct for that shift.

Thanks Guys. Right now I am shooting RAW + JPG. It akes it easy when I need to send a picture to a friend or grandparent. I know that LR has an export feature, but I have yet to play with it. Yes, I understand what you mean about RAW fiels having more picture data than JPG's. The JPG's ave been compressed and don't have all the original picture data. (It's like having the negative to print form, for those od us who used those things in the past...)

~Dom

Obtong wrote in post #4207670
Thanks Guys. Right now I am shooting RAW + JPG. It akes it easy when I need to send a picture to a friend or grandparent. I know that LR has an export feature, but I have yet to play with it. Yes, I understand what you mean about RAW fiels having more picture data than JPG's. The JPG's ave been compressed and don't have all the original picture data. (It's like having the negative to print form, for those od us who used those things in the past...)

~Dom

you can also use irfanview to view and quick process RAW files into jpegs. absolutely no different than processing a jpeg and of course will save you space if shooting RAW only.

ed erader