phototektour
Established
Hi folks,
sorry for my bad English. I got a problem converting ERF to jpg. Pics in ERF are very well regulated by Epson-PhotoRaw and also by Epson-PlugIn in Photoshop. But after saving as a jpg the sharpness und brilliance are lost.
Same done with NEFs from my D300 in Capture NX doesn´t show these probs.
Soon, I´ll get crazy. Whats going wrong. Thanks for help.
R
sorry for my bad English. I got a problem converting ERF to jpg. Pics in ERF are very well regulated by Epson-PhotoRaw and also by Epson-PlugIn in Photoshop. But after saving as a jpg the sharpness und brilliance are lost.
Same done with NEFs from my D300 in Capture NX doesn´t show these probs.
Soon, I´ll get crazy. Whats going wrong. Thanks for help.
R
JeffGreene
(@)^(@)
Can you share some examples. Post some before and afters. Thanks.
tajart
ancien
raw=+jpeg
raw=+jpeg
have you considered shooting raw+jpeg?
i find my raw files processed with the epson software more rewarding than when converted in my old version of cs2 using the plugin...
raw=+jpeg
have you considered shooting raw+jpeg?
i find my raw files processed with the epson software more rewarding than when converted in my old version of cs2 using the plugin...
phototektour
Established
Okay,
sorry, it took a while to get one without people, without ©. So finally, i did new ones, out of the window. Maybe, not the best example, because light is going down. But you can still see the difference.
And posting raw ... I don´t Know how. Here you can see screenshot and the originals are at download.
First one is jpg, second ERF
http://www.phototektour.de/download/rd1/EPSN0299.jpg.zip
http://www.phototektour.de/download/rd1/EPSN0299.ERF.zip
Greets R
sorry, it took a while to get one without people, without ©. So finally, i did new ones, out of the window. Maybe, not the best example, because light is going down. But you can still see the difference.
And posting raw ... I don´t Know how. Here you can see screenshot and the originals are at download.
First one is jpg, second ERF
http://www.phototektour.de/download/rd1/EPSN0299.jpg.zip
http://www.phototektour.de/download/rd1/EPSN0299.ERF.zip
Greets R
Attachments
Last edited:
phototektour
Established
Double yes, I agree ... if you mean processing with epson software at mac/pc. But the result is mostly lost saving as jpg.
tajart
ancien
raw-jpeg
raw-jpeg
hello again,
i downloaded your files and opened them in cs2 on my mac, using the epson plugin to convert the raw file. when looking at both the raw file and the jpeg, both look fine on my monitor, with the jpeg being sharp and with higher contrast. i don't know the reasons for this, but that is how they how appear here.
when i looked at the image size, the jpeg came in at 300 dpi, 3008 wide x 2000 h, and 17.2M. the default setting for my jpeg images out of the camera is 600 dpi for jpegs, and 240 for raw images.
one other area i experiment with is with the film settings, trying to find the subtle differences when adjusting different characteristics.
anyone else?
raw-jpeg
hello again,
i downloaded your files and opened them in cs2 on my mac, using the epson plugin to convert the raw file. when looking at both the raw file and the jpeg, both look fine on my monitor, with the jpeg being sharp and with higher contrast. i don't know the reasons for this, but that is how they how appear here.
when i looked at the image size, the jpeg came in at 300 dpi, 3008 wide x 2000 h, and 17.2M. the default setting for my jpeg images out of the camera is 600 dpi for jpegs, and 240 for raw images.
one other area i experiment with is with the film settings, trying to find the subtle differences when adjusting different characteristics.
anyone else?
tajart
ancien
lens
lens
which lens did you use for this image?
lens
which lens did you use for this image?
phototektour
Established
Hello tajart,
thanks for helping.
Lens for the image was a Tele-Elmarit 2,8/90mm, Blende 8
Have you switched beetwen the screenshots? No difference seen?
My feeling is, that the image shown in PhotoRaw preview is a lot better (sharper), than afterwards saved as jpg or even as tiff. So it doesn´t matter what lens or kind of film is used ... i think. If you are interested, take the erf file, process it in PhotoRaw and save as jpg, don´t close the window. Open the jpg and compare. What is better?
:bang:
R
thanks for helping.
Lens for the image was a Tele-Elmarit 2,8/90mm, Blende 8
Have you switched beetwen the screenshots? No difference seen?
My feeling is, that the image shown in PhotoRaw preview is a lot better (sharper), than afterwards saved as jpg or even as tiff. So it doesn´t matter what lens or kind of film is used ... i think. If you are interested, take the erf file, process it in PhotoRaw and save as jpg, don´t close the window. Open the jpg and compare. What is better?
:bang:
R
tajart
ancien
i'll do that next.
i was only curious about which lens you used. i have the fat-tele 90- very nice on the rd1.
back in a few.
i was only curious about which lens you used. i have the fat-tele 90- very nice on the rd1.
back in a few.
phototektour
Established
tajart
ancien
raw-jpeg
raw-jpeg
when i convert from raw to jpeg it all looks good.
i notice that the jpeg that you included originally, looks good, higher contrast and very crisp.
when i look at the file info i find that my jpeg conversion goes to 72 dpi, as is your erf file, but that your jpg (original) is at 300 dpi.
i am signing off but will look in later.
good luck
raw-jpeg
when i convert from raw to jpeg it all looks good.
i notice that the jpeg that you included originally, looks good, higher contrast and very crisp.
when i look at the file info i find that my jpeg conversion goes to 72 dpi, as is your erf file, but that your jpg (original) is at 300 dpi.
i am signing off but will look in later.
good luck
LCT
ex-newbie
Both have the Epson color profile embedded in them.
Easy to remove if need be.
Otherwise there are slight differences in contrast and color cast (mainly blue) giving a feeling of different brightness and sharpness between them.
Both need a bit of PP IMHO.
Easy to remove if need be.
Otherwise there are slight differences in contrast and color cast (mainly blue) giving a feeling of different brightness and sharpness between them.
Both need a bit of PP IMHO.
phototektour
Established
Hi,
@tajart
dpi is only in relationship to the printing size, bigger size and lower dpi, smaller size and higher dpi and so on. The result on the screen with 72dpi is everytimes the same, try it out. Preset was 600, I chosed (<?) 300dpi as best for print jobs.
@LCT
"...the feeling of ..." is shown here, see download
http://www.phototektour.de/download/rd1/compare.jpg.zip
I did it on PowerPC and IntelMac (different soft versions from Epson) and I got the same result. Again, same procedere with CaptureNX and Nikon files are proper.
Thank´s a lot
R
@tajart
dpi is only in relationship to the printing size, bigger size and lower dpi, smaller size and higher dpi and so on. The result on the screen with 72dpi is everytimes the same, try it out. Preset was 600, I chosed (<?) 300dpi as best for print jobs.
@LCT
"...the feeling of ..." is shown here, see download
http://www.phototektour.de/download/rd1/compare.jpg.zip
I did it on PowerPC and IntelMac (different soft versions from Epson) and I got the same result. Again, same procedere with CaptureNX and Nikon files are proper.
Thank´s a lot
R
Last edited:
phototektour
Established
LCT
ex-newbie
Ah yes i see what you mean. The screen image of the Epson raw converters looks sharper and more contrasty than the real picture out of it. That's true but i don't care AFAIC because i prefer other tools than Epsons for PP. Just try this if you wish. For color works, don't use the EdgeEnhance tool of the Epson raw converters as it increases digital noise too much. Save as tif or psd, not jpeg directly. Open the tif or psd file in Photoshop or same, uncheck the Epson color profile case if you don't like it. Close the file, open it again in P'shop or same and adjust WB, brightness, contrast and sharpening. I use iCorrect and Fred Miranda's Nikon CS Pro plug-ins personally but your mileage may vary. And in the very end of the process, save as a jpeg file if need be.
AFAIC i prefer Capture One v4 for color works but you can get good results with the Epson raw converter anyway.
phototektour
Established
Hi,
you are kidding, yes? Not serious abiut switching so often the progs. Meanwhile I´m thinking its a bug (I know, its not a bug, its "the analog" feature) not to get in jpg, what i´m doing in raw with EpsonRaw.
Remember, same doing with the Nikon stuff is perfekt!
Maybe, you are right, I´ve to look for another software for processing Epson files. Asking the layouter or proofer, what they are using maybe will help.
Thank you guys,
if there are still more ideas, let me know
Greets R
you are kidding, yes? Not serious abiut switching so often the progs. Meanwhile I´m thinking its a bug (I know, its not a bug, its "the analog" feature) not to get in jpg, what i´m doing in raw with EpsonRaw.
Remember, same doing with the Nikon stuff is perfekt!
Maybe, you are right, I´ve to look for another software for processing Epson files. Asking the layouter or proofer, what they are using maybe will help.
Thank you guys,
if there are still more ideas, let me know
Greets R
LCT
ex-newbie
No just trying to help you the best i can.
--
Well-known
I experience something similar when shooting .erfs and converting into .tiff. The adjusted picture within PhotoRAW is about the best quality I have ever seen. But when converted into tiffs or jpegs the quality deteriorates immensely. I contacted Epson UK (I bought the camera from always helpful Robert White) and they gave the following response:
"In answer to your e-mail, the loss in quality in the image when changing from the raw file to the JPEG or TIFF file is due to the image compression that takes place during the image compression. The programs you have mentioned are only basic programs when it comes to converting raw files to these type of file. To keep the quality you will need to use more professional software such as the Adobe Photoshop CS range of programs along with the EPSON RAW plugin file."
Since I have not bought the CS-line I have not tried it. I am still very satisfied with using the R-D1s but I would really, really love to get the output I get when making adjustments inside PhotoRAW (which is my favorite photo software by far). Since I never print I cannot say if that is also an issue or if it relates to screen view only.
Cheers,
karspoul
phototektour
Established
@ LCT
Sorry, really Thank you for your suggestions. For my person I need a faster workflow.
@ karspoul
Thank´s, that means I´m not silly about that. I will have a talk to the people from the printing-agency, but this will take some time. If there are any news, I will post it here.
So long
R
Sorry, really Thank you for your suggestions. For my person I need a faster workflow.
@ karspoul
Thank´s, that means I´m not silly about that. I will have a talk to the people from the printing-agency, but this will take some time. If there are any news, I will post it here.
So long
R
LCT
ex-newbie
Hard to do less than 5 minutes by pic with any of my raw converters AFAIC as i always need to tweak more or less in P'shop afterwards. As far as speed is concerned i don't go faster with Capture One v4. Silkypix could be another alternative but C1v4's IQ is better IMHO.