# Converting RAW to JPEG



## kitjv

As a new LR user, I'm still sorting things out.

What is the easiest way to convert a RAW image into a JPEG after processing? This is NOT for export. I simply would like to replace the processed RAW image with a JPEG in the same location. BTW, I am using LR4 (Mac OS X10.7).

Thank you for your help.


----------



## Denis de Gannes

Lightroom does not ever allow you to replace the original images you have imported. Only way is to export to the same location, which will create the jpeg file alongside the raw file. Then delete the raw file from Lightroom. This is not normally recommended, best to have a look at some of the videos on the Adobe tv website.
http://tv.adobe.com/product/lightroom/

This will bring you up to date on how to use Lightroom. Its really not like Photoshop or other pixel editing programs.


----------



## clee01l

I'm sure others will follow me on this.  You really do not want to destroy your original raw images. They are the original and if deleted can never be recovered.  Technology changes. What was a 'good' image in LR2 can be an even better image in LR3 & 4. Who knows what you can do with a mediocre image in LR 5 or 6? I've read about technology that can fix OOF images. Not here today, but now I am reluctant to delete my blurry images. 

Derivative images (those 'finished' JPEGs) can be cataloged when exported. While this is usually not necessary, I can see reasons for cataloging your very best finished work.

LR as a non-destructive editor has no save option so, exporting to JPEG or TIFF is the only way to 'bake-in' the adjustments. Once done, those images will be forever locked into the quality and state when they were created.

Its a hard concept to grasp for some people, but not those who seriously understand the need for archiving visual history. Probably some where in the back of your grandmothers closet is a shoebox or photo album full of treasured prints, frozen exactly the way they were printed an slowly being destroyed by time.  You are not likely to find the original negatives because your parents and grand parents did not see the value in them.  But you probably do and would give anything to be able to print another copy or turn the negative into an digital.  Those RAW files are your negatives preserve them for your future generations. 

When I started our in LR2in 2009, I had ~23000 images. Since then, I have taken another 40,000 images. My cataloged inventory is now around 15,000.  One thing LR has taught me is to be more discriminatory.  I cull master originals three times. Once on import, again during post processing and a third time when I use LR to move the master originals to an external drive. 

Consider these things before you permanently delete the digital negative.


----------



## kitjv

Thank you, Denis & Cletus. Points well-taken. I will keep all my images in CR2 format until the time of export. Yes, I am slowly learning to think in terms of LR, rather than PS. Many thanks.


----------



## carson

At this point I don't keep any jpgs, I export to jpg for what ever I need it for, usually to sell a print, then it gets deleted, it never goes back into my catalog. The next time I need a jpg of that image I just export it again. The DNG files never get deleted.


----------



## kitjv

carson said:


> At this point I don't keep any jpgs, I export to jpg for what ever I need it for, usually to sell a print, then it gets deleted, it never goes back into my catalog. The next time I need a jpg of that image I just export it again. The DNG files never get deleted.



That is exactly what will become part of my workflow.

I have to admit that I am delighted with LR. Although ACR & Bridge are viable alternatives, I will likely never go back.


----------



## Rhobbe

Having a 36 Mpixel camera I would like to pick up this thread. I have a number of images that are OK to have as JPG. For example I use to take an image of information about different places. Yes, in theory, I can modify the settings of the camera just for this image, but when I have done this I have forgotten to put it back to RAW format. So I don´t do that. 

A great feature would be to select allt images of this kind and press a convert button (RAW - -> JPG), relasing Mbytes and Mbytes of valuable disk space. 

Does anyone have any suggetions on workflow to come close to this?


----------



## Hal P Anderson

Welcome to the forum.

While not converting to JPG, you could convert those raw files to DNG with lossy compression, thus saving a tonne of disk space. Try it with one and see how much you save. 

Menu item:  Library/Convert Photo to DNG...

Hal


----------



## clee01l

Rhobbe said:


> Having a 36 Mpixel camera I would like to pick up this thread. I have a number of images that are OK to have as JPG.


Rhobbe, welcome to our forum. If you did not shoot them in the camera as JPEG, why bother?  I too have a D800 and I shoot 14 bit uncompressed NEFs. Storage size should never be an issue. If it were an issue, you should be shooting with a Canon instead of a Nikon or DX instead of FX.  If the image is worth keeping, it is worth keeping the original. You time and energy will be better spent culling out the image that are still hanging around and not worth keeping in any form.  My current image inventory is ~18,000 images. I started LR in 2009 with 23,000 images and I add about 20,000 new images every year.  The current inventory takes up about 350GB.  Of that 350GB, I estimate that at least 50GB should be culled still, even though I go through a rigorous culling process for every shoot.  When you can say that every image in your catalog is a "keeper",  and buying another terabyte HD for $100USD is cost prohibitive, then you might consider alternatives. Do you really need a $500 new lens if you can't afford the storage space to keep the good photos that you take with it?


----------



## Rhobbe

Hal P Anderson said:


> Welcome to the forum.
> 
> While not converting to JPG, you could convert those raw files to DNG with lossy compression, thus saving a tonne of disk space. Try it with one and see how much you save.
> 
> Menu item:  Library/Convert Photo to DNG...
> 
> Hal



Woow, I have missed that!  I made a test and my files are reduced from 20Mb to 7,1 Mb with a keyclick. This is really useful. Thanks a lot!


----------



## Rhobbe

clee01l said:


> Rhobbe, welcome to our forum. If you did not shoot them in the camera as JPEG, why bother?  I too have a D800 and I shoot 14 bit uncompressed NEFs. Storage size should never be an issue. If it were an issue, you should be shooting with a Canon instead of a Nikon or DX instead of FX.  If the image is worth keeping, it is worth keeping the original. You time and energy will be better spent culling out the image that are still hanging around and not worth keeping in any form.  My current image inventory is ~18,000 images. I started LR in 2009 with 23,000 images and I add about 20,000 new images every year.  The current inventory takes up about 350GB.  Of that 350GB, I estimate that at least 50GB should be culled still, even though I go through a rigorous culling process for every shoot.  When you can say that every image in your catalog is a "keeper",  and buying another terabyte HD for $100USD is cost prohibitive, then you might consider alternatives. Do you really need a $500 new lens if you can't afford the storage space to keep the good photos that you take with it?



Thank you for your invitation. I´ve been a happy user of LR since the first Beta, many years ago. I partly agree with what you say. But the story is not fully to buy another HD. To be able to have 100% reliable backup and recover, I need 3XHD, one internal HD in my mac (Actually two that I setup as a RAID), one external for the time machine, and an alternate external that I keep at my work. I have now 1,2 TB of data, and I see the 2,0 TB wall coming against me  The D800 is a wonderful camera but eats diskspace, not mentioning what happens if you open the file in PS and add some layers ...


----------

