RAW and B+W JPEGS

[burkey]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After shooting raw files for years with both my M8 and other assorted cameras I've come to really like the look of the in-camera B+W Jpegs camera out of the M8. A silly question I'm sure but - if I shoot in raw but set the color saturation to B+W in the M8 there should be no affect to the color in the raw file. Correct? A couple of quick tests shows no affect.

I know on cameras such as my DLUX 4 setting the camera to dynamic B+W significantly affects the color in a negative way in the raw files, although correctable in post.

Any thoughts on this will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

. . . David, (Burkey)

[efix]

Technically, what you set for the in-camera JPEG conversion shouldn't affect the RAW data. I haven't seen any negative effects when shooting b&w and then opening the RAWs - Lightroom would always display them in full colour.

[Nicoleica]

Hi David,

 

Yes, that is correct. Any settings such as these that you set on the M8 only affect the in-camera JPG files. The RAW (DNG) files remain untouched. It can be quite handy if you use JPG & DNG together, as you can get two different pictures straight out of the camera. As you have discovered, the in-camera JPG files from the M8 can be pretty good, even if some may dislike them.

[ptarmigan]

I tend to shoot RAW + B&W jpeg so I can use the B&W image to check exposure, I find it works well other than the camera takes ages to process the image before review.

[burkey]

A thanks to all for the input. I shoot with mostly CV lenses. I find that setting the sharpness up one notch seems to improve the B+W JPEGS quite a bit. I'm still processing them in LR for sharpness and tonal manipulation.

As long as the RAW files remain untouched shooting both makes a lot of sense. At least for now. ;-)

. . . David

[chris_livsey]

As mentioned the only downside to the strategy of shooting both is the processing delay. You should look at an in camera jpeg against a processed one for artifacts. If you are critical you will see differences in that the in camera appears to be inferior. It depends on personal preferences if this is acceptable for the purposes you put the files to.

 

It is my experience that "blowing up" a poor, aesthetic, picture doesn't improve it so most of my work stays small

[geoffreyg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've had some really good luck with BW jpgs out of the M8. They seem to print well.

 

I just ran a set of prints- from jpgs into Imageprint (rip) and printed on the older Epson 4000, semi-gloss paper, and I swear I'm back in the darkroom. A bit of fiddling with black point in the rip (latest version of the rip 8 is much improved), and - shazaam - its bliss over here. Deep rich blacks, good tones, sharp. I haven't been over letter size yet, that's tomorrow.

 

I'm sure if one fiddles, the RAW's will be the way to go. But for snaps with a punch.... its nice to have an easy workflow.

[bocaburger]

I sometimes shoot DNG+small JPEG as a visual check (sort of an in-camera proof, if you will) if my ultimate goal is B&W prints, but I've never actually printed the JPEG.