fotoism Posted July 25, 2017 Share #1 Posted July 25, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Can anyone tell me if you set the compression to DNG+JPG Fine, should the two files be equally sharp out of camera? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 25, 2017 Posted July 25, 2017 Hi fotoism, Take a look here DNG vs JPG. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
prk60091 Posted July 25, 2017 Share #2 Posted July 25, 2017 Can anyone tell me if you set the compression to DNG+JPG Fine, should the two files be equally sharp out of camera? i cannot 100% say yes-- i have been doing some a/b testing shooting dng vs dng + jpg and it appears to my eyes (60+ years of them) that they are on a screen. . . i have not made any physical prints from the camera generated jpg . . . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted July 25, 2017 Share #3 Posted July 25, 2017 The beauty of M8 is in the small, yet absolutely sufficient DNG files. I never set it to both. JPEG1 only was never a problem, but if M8 is set to DNG only, it writes it faster (significantly). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoism Posted July 25, 2017 Author Share #4 Posted July 25, 2017 I understand that. When I first got the M8 I shot JPG fine. It wasn't a problem back then. Files were reasonably good. Then I went on to DNG, and have been doing DNG only for almost 10 years now. I just happened to shoot some test shots on DNG+JPG Fine and discover there is an obvious difference in sharpness. That piqued my curiosity, hence the question. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Two pairs of shots are shown in this down-sized screen capture from within Capture One. DNG on left and JPG Fine on right. Straight out of camera with no processing at all. Even at this resolution with the artifact the difference is easily visible. Should it be? Or something wrong? Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Two pairs of shots are shown in this down-sized screen capture from within Capture One. DNG on left and JPG Fine on right. Straight out of camera with no processing at all. Even at this resolution with the artifact the difference is easily visible. Should it be? Or something wrong? ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/275038-dng-vs-jpg/?do=findComment&comment=3323514'>More sharing options...
lct Posted July 25, 2017 Share #5 Posted July 25, 2017 Your jpef is way too soft and your dng looks ovesharpened but it is difficult to say on so little pics. Now i'm a raw shooter myself so i always choose dng but i add basic jpeg for archiving purpose only. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoism Posted July 26, 2017 Author Share #6 Posted July 26, 2017 I forgot to add: the above pictures are 100% crops, everything at default without any processing at all. The DNGs look over-sharpened maybe because of the back-lighting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoism Posted August 18, 2017 Author Share #7 Posted August 18, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have contacted Leica CS and am waiting to see what they have to say about this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arno_nyhm Posted August 18, 2017 Share #8 Posted August 18, 2017 (edited) using dng today brings your M8 to todays opportunities. any modern rawconverter has more capability than the ones used ten years ago. postprocessing by modern software just improves imagequality. so better not limit yourself with .jpg of technical standars from ten years ago. you wouldn't want to use a kodak gold of 1986 in your M6 today and rather use some modern film. that's the same. Edited August 18, 2017 by arno_nyhm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted October 9, 2017 Share #9 Posted October 9, 2017 How is sharpening set on M8? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arno_nyhm Posted October 10, 2017 Share #10 Posted October 10, 2017 using dng today brings your M8 to todays opportunities. any modern rawconverter has more capability than the ones used ten years ago. postprocessing by modern software just improves imagequality. that's just the point. you wouldn't want to use a kodak gold of 1986 in your M6 today and rather use some modern film. that's the same. i'd rather use some kodachrome 25... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoism Posted October 11, 2017 Author Share #11 Posted October 11, 2017 How is sharpening set on M8? I found out that's exactly where things went wrong. For whatever reason I had sharpening set to "off". Now like I said before I only shoot DNG so how and when this happened I had no idea. But when I happened to test the DNG+jpeg fine the jpeg file became very soft. My worry was not soft jpeg - I don't use it, but if there is something else going wrong, so I investigated. Now it's all clear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted November 20, 2017 Share #12 Posted November 20, 2017 Sharpness must be customized for end use and size. JPEG makes this impossible. JPEG is 8 bit. When you make gradiations in post, banding occurs. Convert to JPEG at end of process or if you just want drugstore prints, JPEG is OK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 20, 2017 Share #13 Posted November 20, 2017 I understand that. When I first got the M8 I shot JPG fine. It wasn't a problem back then. Files were reasonably good. Then I went on to DNG, and have been doing DNG only for almost 10 years now. I just happened to shoot some test shots on DNG+JPG Fine and discover there is an obvious difference in sharpness. That piqued my curiosity, hence the question. DNG+JPG.jpg Two pairs of shots are shown in this down-sized screen capture from within Capture One. DNG on left and JPG Fine on right. Straight out of camera with no processing at all. Even at this resolution with the artifact the difference is easily visible. Should it be? Or something wrong? I agree that there is something wrong with the JPG, but even at this small size the left one shows one of the pitfalls of C1: One must be very careful with the sharpening in C1, otherwise it can easily look oversharpened and artificial. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now