# Question about shooting in the raw (image quality)



## Andrea (Aug 25, 2013)

So, I am new at photography and hear that shooting in the raw is better....I try it, and this is what I get.  It looks awful. I am finding my JPEG images look so much better.   
JPEG on the left (right of her face) and RAW image converted to JPEG in lightroom on the right (left of her face)
The raw image looks that grainy in lightroom before I convert it as well. Is this correct??  Because if so, what's the big hype about shooting in the raw over jpeg.  It looks awful to me. =/  (I am assuming that I must be doing something wrong) 



I'm shooting with a canon 60D
shot in the raw and in jpeg just so I could SEE the difference.  
Thanks in advance for any help/advice


----------



## clee01l (Aug 25, 2013)

Your camera has always shot RAW. Before, post processing occurred in the camera and the 12-14 bit color image that you captured on the sensor was converted to an 8 bit color JPEG with a fixed WB and develop settings that you set on the camera menu.  The JPEG that come out of the camera is compressed and when uncompressed you lose data never to be recovered not to mention all of those color bits that the camera simply threw away.

RAW (CR2) images if you could see them are flat toneless and somewhat noisy.  LR will demosaic the data and convert it into RGB order.  The WB will be flexible in LR where it is "baked in" in the JPEG.  You will have a fuller color range in LR where as you have a limited color palette in the JPEG.  You will need to learn to do all of the things the tiny computer in your camera did for you.  

If you are processing your RAWs in LR, you need to turn off the ALO and HTP settings in your camera.  LR does not use these and they can alter your data in unattractive ways if processed in LR.

So your education in developing images has just begun.  I have no doubt that you can duplicate what the camera did to produce the JPEG and better that in time. And you will have the fullest color range to work with before exporting to a Lossy JPEG.


----------



## Replytoken (Aug 25, 2013)

A properly exposed, properly processed raw image may look different from your SOOC jpeg, but it should not look worse.  Are you having LR apply any settings on import that perhaps need to be changed?

--Ken


----------



## Andrea (Aug 25, 2013)

Ken- I'm not sure.  I have not changed any settings from the original install.
Cletus -  Thank you....I have MUCH TO LEARN apparently.  =)  Now I'm going to learn how to turn off the ALO and HTP settings in my camera.  (And what they even ARE first!)


----------



## sizzlingbadger (Aug 25, 2013)

The big difference I see in your examples is noise. Try adding some noise reduction in LR, which by default doesn't apply any so can look very grainy at higher ISO's.

Your camera will sharpen, de-noise, tone and may even fix lens aberrations but when you shoot RAW you have to do this manually or with presets / custom defaults.


----------



## Replytoken (Aug 26, 2013)

sizzlingbadger said:


> The big difference I see in your examples is noise. Try adding some noise reduction in LR, which by default doesn't apply any so can look very grainy at higher ISO's.
> 
> Your camera will sharpen, de-noise, tone and may even fix lens aberrations but when you shoot RAW you have to do this manually or with presets / custom defaults.



While I do not disagree with your suggestion, Nik, I am a bit surprised that a raw file would show that much noise.  Except in situations like long evening exposures, my D300 files never look that noisy upon import.  That was why I was wondering if the OP had some settings being applied on import.  Is this characteristic of 60D files?

--Ken


----------



## BenjaminJ (Sep 1, 2013)

clee01l said:


> Your camera has always shot RAW. Before, post processing occurred in the camera and the 12-14 bit color image that you captured on the sensor was converted to an 8 bit color JPEG with a fixed WB and develop settings that you set on the camera menu.  The JPEG that come out of the camera is compressed and when uncompressed you lose data never to be recovered not to mention all of those color bits that the camera simply threw away.
> 
> RAW (CR2) images if you could see them are flat toneless and somewhat noisy.  LR will demosaic the data and convert it into RGB order.  The WB will be flexible in LR where it is "baked in" in the JPEG.  You will have a fuller color range in LR where as you have a limited color palette in the JPEG.  You will need to learn to do all of the things the tiny computer in your camera did for you.
> 
> ...




Whats HTP and ALO?


----------



## Jim Wilde (Sep 1, 2013)

HTP = Highlight Tone Priority
ALO = Auto Lighting Optimisation

These are in-camera settings which if used can affect the camera's exposure setting, which is then compensated by the camera when doing a raw conversion if shooting Jpeg. The camera manufacturer's own software will also auto-compensate during raw conversion, but not Lightroom. This means that they are just about the only camera settings that can effect Raw files in Lightroom (typically the images would appear under-exposed), so we generally recommend that these settings are disabled.

Note that these two settings are specific to Canon DSLR's, the Nikon equivalent to ALO is "Active-D Lighting", but I have no idea if there are equivalent options in Sony cameras.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Sep 2, 2013)

Jim Wilde said:


> Note that these two settings are specific to Canon DSLR's, the Nikon equivalent to ALO is "Active-D Lighting", but I have no idea if there are equivalent options in Sony cameras.



Yep, Sony, has DRO - Dynamic Range Optimisation


----------



## sizzlingbadger (Sep 5, 2013)

Replytoken said:


> While I do not disagree with your suggestion, Nik, I am a bit surprised that a raw file would show that much noise.  Except in situations like long evening exposures, my D300 files never look that noisy upon import.  That was why I was wondering if the OP had some settings being applied on import.  Is this characteristic of 60D files?
> 
> --Ken



Thats because you shoot with a Nikon and your not used to the inferior Canon image quality :mrgreen:

(That was a joke, don't start a war)


----------



## Replytoken (Sep 5, 2013)

sizzlingbadger said:


> Thats because you shoot with a Nikon and your not used to the inferior Canon image quality :mrgreen:
> 
> (That was a joke, don't start a war)



I am having enough trouble learning how to extract the most out of Olympus and Panasonic raw files at the moment, so you can be assured that I will not be starting any Canon/Nikon war!  It's funny how I have become familiar and comfortable with how to process my D300 NEF files, but ORF and RW2 files seem so foreign to me in the Develop module.  I am sure that my skills will continue to improve, but all raw files are certainly not alike.

--Ken


----------



## clee01l (Sep 5, 2013)

Replytoken said:


> I am having enough trouble learning how to extract the most out of Olympus and Panasonic raw files at the moment, so you can be assured that I will not be starting any Canon/Nikon war!  It's funny how I have become familiar and comfortable with how to process my D300 NEF files, but ORF and RW2 files seem so foreign to me in the Develop module.  I am sure that my skills will continue to improve, but all raw files are certainly not alike.
> 
> --Ken


I switched for Pentax to a D800.  The Pentax DNGs took a lot of work to bring them up to an acceptable level of post processing.  I was pleasantly surprised to find that I can apply a Basic Develop preset to the D800 NEFs and sometimes that is all that I need.  So  It really may be the camera brand. 

As for the OP's noisy Canon, This could be the result of having ALO and/or HTP set on in the camera.  Or Nik could be right after all


----------



## Denis de Gannes (Sep 5, 2013)

Its quite obvious that Adobe pays lots more attention in the creation of profiles for Canon and Nikon cameras, hey there are more Canon and Nikon users to buy their software. That's why they take the time to create Camera matching profiles for those cameras and not others.


----------



## jaytom (Sep 11, 2013)

Andrea: I am a fairly new photographer myself. I take pictures of houses for the Realtors in my area for their use in MLS, print, etc. When I started a guy that taught me said "set this to here this to that and then take the picture. I have been doing that for 4 years and yes my pictures were OK. But I then thought it is time to find out what ISO is, Aperture does, what about exposer, you get the idea, I really knew nothing about nothing. So I hired a local Photographer to teach me the in's and out's and it has made all the difference in the world. My photos are 100% better and I have a better understanding of the post processing. It wasn't cheap but oh my was it worth ever penny. I am coming down the home strength now and I would recommend having someone, first off who knows how to teach and second knows how to take pictures show u the ropes


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Sep 11, 2013)

Welcome to the forum jaytom.  I'd agree 100%, particularly for anyone doing it as work.


----------

