Vivid vs. standard vs natural

[albert]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just switched to vivid. I’ve never entered this zone before. Feedback, please. I’m heading to our N. MN lake cabin for 13 days. Fantastic photograper’s destination.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Le Chef]

Vivid certainly will make your images pop!

 

Not sure if you've tried LightRoom or any of the other post production programs or not, but there are advantages to doing so. You can shoot in RAW and then decide how you want your shot to look later, and then change your mind again.

 

Once you've shot in JPEG using "Vivid" there's much less you can do to change that image.

 

So if you like the idea of keeping your options open then shooting RAW and using LightRoom might be worth considering. As a halfway house you can shoot RAW + JPEG which allows you more flexibility if you're not sure about LightRoom just yet, but might consider it later.

[miro]

Switched from what , and why ?

Vivid is too vivid , unless your looking for a vivid rendering .

Sounds like your going to be in nature ; why not play with the Natural setting .

Start with bumping up Sharpness and Saturation one notch as a start .

The T's jpegs are controversial .

[ramarren]

Set JPEG + DNG (or raw, however they list it). That way whatever JPEG settings you make, you can always go back to the DNG files and reprocess the photos however appeals to you. 

 

I set my camera to DNG only. I don't care what the JPEGs it makes look like normally. I only turn on JPEG output when I need something for immediate use in the field. 

[Bill W]

I use JPEG + DNG and vivid for my jpegs. Each to their own but I like it.

[albert]

Thanks fellows. I get it...NOW!

[M11 for me]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maybe its not such a good idea to just use JPGs. You loose a lot of data and in 99.999% of MY cases the DNG is better anyway. So I do not want to permanently compare 2 pictures. This is time consuming and the result is actually clear from the beginning. All these camera settings (vivid etc) apply only to JPGs and when shooting DNG you can add whatever you like in post. Assuming that you use a post processing as Lightroom etc.

[jaapv]

Agree. I find images developed from DNG always better than in-camera JPGs. Not surprising, as the camera has only limited processing power and algorithms.

[miro]

A smartphone inspired camera like the T should have jpegs good to go .

[albert]

DNG + Standard

I have PP software

Case closed

 

Thanks to all of you.

[Guest Steve7]

For me, DNG + Vivid JPG.  I love Vivid on the CL, not on all cameras, but the CL pulls it off wonderfully.

[new2leica]

A smartphone inspired camera like the T should have jpegs good to go .

 

I thought so too but after looking at a few found a definite cyan cast when compared side by side to the DNG.  This was on an original T with its original FW. Having a CL now the T might be little more than an oversized rear lens cap. 

 

If I want saturated there's Agfa Ultra 50 to shoot.

[ramarren]

A smartphone inspired camera like the T should have jpegs good to go .

 

 

I dunno. I find I need to post-process most of my smartphone photos too to improve their color balance and rendering qualities.

[jaapv]

Same here; I use Snapseed.