wolan Posted January 8, 2023 Share #1 Posted January 8, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, The M11 has a massive resolution and the JPG files also contain massive information, to the point that one could decide, assuming he only does minor tweaks to the image in post, to only work with JPG and skip the RAW files all together. I am a RAW shooter, but I am curious to know whether there are users in this forum, who are happy with the approach I mentioned Thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 Hi wolan, Take a look here M11 Jpeg output. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Photoworks Posted January 8, 2023 Share #2 Posted January 8, 2023 I can see that only in a very controlled environment . In studio, set WB and control lighting, no need of lens correction. I suppose if you are happy with iPhone photos you can be happy with JPG can be enough for you. For me the RAW capability surpass what the camera can do. Editing software is getting better over time. I still shoot DNG+JPG just to see what Leica can do in JPG. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wdahab Posted January 8, 2023 Share #3 Posted January 8, 2023 The JPEG engine in the M11, imo, is very bad at anything above about 2000 or 4000 ISO. For whatever reason, it has a really difficult time handling large scale color noise, leading to JPEGs full of red and green splotches everywhere. It's especially bad when shooting people at high ISO, as they get very sickly splotchy faces. In my experience it made it unusably bad. While that noise is still there in the RAW files, conversion by any other JPEG engine other than the in-body one is lightyears better. That's not even taking into consideration whether you play with any programs noise reduction. IMO, the DNGs are *soooo* good on the M11 and the JPEGs are *soooo* bad, that you really have to be interested in working with Raw images on the M11. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoworks Posted January 9, 2023 Share #4 Posted January 9, 2023 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! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/360126-m11-jpeg-output/?do=findComment&comment=4634837'>More sharing options...
kona Posted January 9, 2023 Share #5 Posted January 9, 2023 15 hours ago, wolan said: Hi, The M11 has a massive resolution and the JPG files also contain massive information, to the point that one could decide, assuming he only does minor tweaks to the image in post, to only work with JPG and skip the RAW files all together. I am a RAW shooter, but I am curious to know whether there are users in this forum, who are happy with the approach I mentioned Thanks. For me it's not just about having a lot of information, but also having the right information. JPGs will have the full resolution but they are still limited to 8 bit colour depth. I don't know in advance how much post processing I will need to do. If I discover that I need to bring up some shadows, adjust the WB, contrast, whatever, a JPG will be very limiting and risk showing noise, banding etc. So there is no reason for me to throw away all this information and limit myself. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DenverSteve Posted January 9, 2023 Share #6 Posted January 9, 2023 17 hours ago, Photoworks said: I can see that only in a very controlled environment . In studio, set WB and control lighting, no need of lens correction. I suppose if you are happy with iPhone photos you can be happy with JPG can be enough for you. For me the RAW capability surpass what the camera can do. Editing software is getting better over time. I still shoot DNG+JPG just to see what Leica can do in JPG. The OP is 100 per cent correct. JPG images are used by, and fine for, the vast majority of photographic applications. The above response is likely the most condescending response I've seen here. Additionally, RAW capability is exactly what the camera can do. Nothing more. The recorded image, whether on film or digital, can't surpass what the camera & lens can do. It is exactly what the camera & lens can do. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted January 9, 2023 Share #7 Posted January 9, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) vor 29 Minuten schrieb DenverSteve: majority of photographic applications My application is far away from the majority. I must be in a niche and thus an M11 😊 My thinking: As I am having photography as a passion it is not enough just shooting the easiest way. I love to work in Lightroom (LR Classic). I tested the difference from JPGs and DNGs many times. As a result I stopped taking JPGs. JPGs might be fine when somebody does NOT want to go into post processing (scenario of @wolan). But then I believe that you could just as well go with the unprocessed DNGs in order to have still your best raw material available. Often the DNGs are as usable as JPGs are ooc. But to be clear: For me "usable" is not enough. I love to work with the new tools that LR gives me: With a click you can choose People (even teeth!!), background, objects. Lightroom gets beter and better with each new version. I want to exploit all these options (incl. Topaz AI as Plugin or in some cases go to Photoshop). And re space that a DNG takes on my computer. I just ordered an external SSD to put all my photographs. That SSD will be less than half full even though I plan to store onto it over 55'000 images. For my thinking there is just one way of taking images: DNGs Maybe I am OT with my post as @wolan wants to hear statement of the JPG shooters . . . I am not that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DenverSteve Posted January 9, 2023 Share #8 Posted January 9, 2023 (edited) 16 minutes ago, M11 for me said: My application is far away from the majority. I must be in a niche and thus an M11 . My thinking: As I am having photography as a passion it is not enough just shooting the easiest way. I love to work in Lightroom (LR Classic). I tested the difference from JPGs and DNGs many times. As a result I stopped taking JPGs. Maybe I am OT with my post as @wolan wants to hear statement of the JPG shooters . . . I am not that. Nope. Your opinion is as valid as anyone's. I shoot everything in both formats and use what I need/want to use. Funny enough, I've never had one client ask me whether the image was a JPG or DNG........... or whether the photo was Tri-X or T-MAX. I've sold thousands of both in 30+ years of commercial photography. Edited January 9, 2023 by DenverSteve Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianforber Posted January 9, 2023 Share #9 Posted January 9, 2023 I don’t go out specifically to shoot jpeg but I do shoot DNG+JPEG. Most of the time I’ll process the DNG but sometimes I like the jpeg better and can’t easily (or at all) replicate that look with the DNG. In that case, I have no hang up using the jpeg. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted January 9, 2023 Share #10 Posted January 9, 2023 vor 1 Stunde schrieb DenverSteve: Nope. Your opinion is as valid as anyone's. I shoot everything in both formats and use what I need/want to use. Funny enough, I've never had one client ask me whether the image was a JPG or DNG........... or whether the photo was Tri-X or T-MAX. I've sold thousands of both in 30+ years of commercial photography. You are absolutely right. Maybe I came across a bit wrong: I am NOT a Pro even though I have a few paid assignements here and there. I just think that it takes too much time for each shot to look at the JPG plus at the DNG and decide . . . what? Most time the DNG is anyway better so I stoped taking both. And when I make such an effort with my pictures I do that just for my wife and myself as we see the difference (she takes pictures as well with her Q2). We are then happy when a bunch of friends and family comment 😃 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 9, 2023 Share #11 Posted January 9, 2023 2 hours ago, DenverSteve said: The recorded image, whether on film or digital, can't surpass what the camera & lens can do. It is exactly what the camera & lens can do. Have a look at the before and after thread We live in the AI era, sir. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DenverSteve Posted January 9, 2023 Share #12 Posted January 9, 2023 17 minutes ago, M11 for me said: ......And when I make such an effort with my pictures I do that just for my wife and myself as we see the difference (she takes pictures as well with her Q2). We are then happy when a bunch of friends and family comment 😃 Happy is all that matters. 😊 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DenverSteve Posted January 9, 2023 Share #13 Posted January 9, 2023 (edited) 23 minutes ago, jaapv said: Have a look at the before and after thread We live in the AI era, sir. Yes, for those that need, or want, extensive post processing. 😉 For me, post-processing is lab work. Years ago I did most of my own lab work but that cut in to my photography. As a photographer, I strive for as close to perfect capture in-camera that I can get. Pre-visualization, proper lighting (to include reflectors, gobos, scrims and lights), knowledge of equipment and aperture control, proper lens selection for appropriate composition....no chimping.... I get exactly what I expect 98% of the time. Just like when I shot film. Edited January 9, 2023 by DenverSteve 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Brown Posted January 9, 2023 Share #14 Posted January 9, 2023 It is not just a matter of minor tweaks that is the difference between RAW and JPG. Noise processing, color processing, applying all sorts of settings and corrections (not always a good thing), the inability to change your mind and just losslessly change settings... With storage as cheap as today, that should not even be a debate. It is Spago's meal vs. frozen TV dinner from WeighWatchers. Nuff said. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted January 9, 2023 Share #15 Posted January 9, 2023 1999: Compared to a digital image with regular VGA resolution, a 3-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2003: Compared to a digital image with regular 3-MP resolution, an 8-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2009: Compared to a digital image with regular 8-MP resolution, a 24-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2021: Compared to a digital image with regular 24-MP resolution, a 60-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2028: Compared to a digital image with regular 60-MP resolution, a 150-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2035: ... 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwesi Posted January 9, 2023 Share #16 Posted January 9, 2023 21 hours ago, wolan said: Hi, The M11 has a massive resolution and the JPG files also contain massive information, to the point that one could decide, assuming he only does minor tweaks to the image in post, to only work with JPG and skip the RAW files all together. I am a RAW shooter, but I am curious to know whether there are users in this forum, who are happy with the approach I mentioned Thanks. Hi Wolan, Years ago I shot the MP240 and M246 side by side and although I enjoyed both cameras I HATED having to decide which lens went on which camera. especially since I used yellow filters for the M246. I ended up selling them both and buying the M10-P when it became available. I still missed my monochrome workflow though so I set the M10-P to shoot DNG and large flat Monochrome jpegs. Truly the best of both worlds. Now with the M11, I've gone back to DNG only. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 10, 2023 Share #17 Posted January 10, 2023 5 hours ago, DenverSteve said: Yes, for those that need, or want, extensive post processing. 😉 For me, post-processing is lab work. Years ago I did most of my own lab work but that cut in to my photography. As a photographer, I strive for as close to perfect capture in-camera that I can get. Pre-visualization, proper lighting (to include reflectors, gobos, scrims and lights), knowledge of equipment and aperture control, proper lens selection for appropriate composition....no chimping.... I get exactly what I expect 98% of the time. Just like when I shot film. I see that differently, and have done so all my photographic life. All you mention and the result is an OOC half-product to be finished. The next part is as important and demands just as much skill. Just like when I shot film, although I am happy I don't have to breathe the fumes any more. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted January 10, 2023 Share #18 Posted January 10, 2023 (edited) vor 23 Stunden schrieb 01af: 1999: Compared to a digital image with regular VGA resolution, a 3-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2003: Compared to a digital image with regular 3-MP resolution, an 8-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2009: Compared to a digital image with regular 8-MP resolution, a 24-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2021: Compared to a digital image with regular 24-MP resolution, a 60-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2028: Compared to a digital image with regular 60-MP resolution, a 150-MP JPEG image contains massive information, so why use raw format? 2035: ... a bit weird stuff 🙃; I hope that is proper english. The writer pretends as if technical innovation is just crap. I am very happy that since 1999 there is a big technological progress. And there is even a huge progress bteween M10 and M10-R or M11. And that will go on. Edited January 10, 2023 by M11 for me Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoworks Posted January 10, 2023 Share #19 Posted January 10, 2023 2 hours ago, M11 for me said: a bit weird stuff 🙃; I hope that is proper english. The writer pretends as if technical innovation is just crap. I am very happy that since 1999 there is a big technological progress. And there is even a huge progress bteween M10 and M10-R or M11. And that will go on. crap can't wait for 2028! for does people enjoying their 3MP pix on the tube monitor, I feel sorry for not getting any better with time, and admiration for not needing more and saving all that money! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genoweffa Posted January 10, 2023 Share #20 Posted January 10, 2023 maybe a bit off tangent.... how large are typical/average DNG and JPEG(by camera) files from M11? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.