CR2 files much sharper than processed jpegs

Hi there - I am using CS6. Can anyone tell me what I might be doing wrong, or if I need to tweak some settings but my jpegs seem quite unsharp in comparison to the CR2 file after processing. The psd file is also not as sharp. Im just using windows photo viewer, but have also viewed the 3 different files in other viewers and I can still see the issue. I have taken into consideration the noise reduction settings etc and always save the jpeg at the highest setting. Should there be such a difference ?

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/rw2r30i154thp02/AACfuRKzwDs8pYGmPi2J7yE0a?dl=0
Hi there - yep I wasnt trying to embed through email, but you cannot embed a psd file, so got a little confused. I will post the jpegs below and copy link the the RAW & PSD files as well.
I guess when Im viewing quickly I just use the windows viewer and that might be my problem, but I have noticed that even in Photoshop Im not happy with the psd & jpeg file.
Thanks for all of your help. Here are some of the files in jpeg & the link to my dropbox below with the RAW & PSD files !
Dropbox - Images to review

Similar Messages

Photoshop saves jpg much sharper than is displaying it

Hi,
I finished my work on an image but when I save it and view it in windows photo viewer the image is much much sharper than inside photoshop( at 100%) .Anyone knows what is causing this?
(using CS6 on windows 7)
Thanks

1.Flattened all layers(in my original psd file) -------saved it as jpeg and the result is sharper than I see it in photoshop.
Are you comparing at 100% view (actual pixels)?
When you are saving as JGP are you reducing pixel dimension? (like you can do in the Save For Web dialog)?
again, can you post a screen shot of the doc in PS and Photoviewer at 100% so we can see what you are describing. In the Photoshop screen grab make sure you include whole document window so we can see view percentage.
When you view at 100% in Photoshop, every pixel in your image is being represented by a monitor pixel. It is the only way to accurately preview a PS image. If a free Microsoft image viewer happens to add sharpness, that is not a problem Photoshop can control.
Also, if you are saving a PSD document as a JPG, that will introduce artifacts, which can affect the appearance of an image.
You will get much more informed feedback if we can actually see what you are describing.

Help with Photoshop CS2 files MUCH larger than normal, possibly not compessing layer masks

Has anyone else come across a problem where Photoshop files grow in size much faster than expected, especially when adding layer masks?
Normally when you add a layer mask the file size grow a small amount if the layer mask is mostly all white or mostly all black. In this case it's like the file size is growing exponentially, almost as if the layer mask isn't being compressed at all.
The file in question although large, is similar dimensions, resolution, and number of layers as other projects that have been worked on and all the usual thing have been checked like resolution, colour mode, bit depth and the image has also been cropped so there's nothing outside of the page.
The file has been checked on 2 different macs and exhibits the same behaviour and Photoshop preferences have been deleted and re-created and we've tried copying the file by dragging layers to a new document of the same dimensions with no success.
The only things we're certain of is that file size grows dramatically when adding layer masks in particular and layers in general.
The file was created by someone else, if that might be a factor, though the file has been "saved as.." with no improvement.
Any ideas?
TIA
Tom
The only

Maybe it has something to do with "Maximize Compatibility". If that's checked when you save, it might add a lot of weight to your file, even with just a simple layer mask. Don't know, haven't done any testing, just a thought.
Edit: Just did a quick test:
1. flat image saved as PSD = 5.2 MB
2. same image converted to a layer with simple layer mask, saved as PSD = 5.8 MB
3. same layer mask image saved WITH "maximize compatibility" = 10.7 MB
So adding "maximize compatibility" nearly doubled this test file. Could be it?

Why is the saved JPG file much bigger than the original JPG file??

I used Image Processor in Bridge CS5 to open a jpeg, apply sharpening action and save as a jpeg. The bit size, color space and pixel dimensions are identical. However, when I save at Quality 12 I get a Jpeg file that is nearly DOUBLE the size of the original jpeg Only if I drop it to Quality 10 do I get a file that approximates, but doesn't equal, the original jpeg.
1) Isn't 12 the same as saying 100% and as such the file size should be the about the same?
2) why would it increase so much? Example about 6 mb to about 12mb???
Does this sound right? I am sure I am doing the steps and setting the parameters correctly. The action simply applies unsharp mask:
I can set the quality to 10 and get an approximate equivalent file size...but I want the higher quality of a 100%/12 setting.
WHAT AM I MISSING???
Thanks - Kevin

WHAT AM I MISSING???
The simple fact that JPEG is always a fully re-compressing format. Your newly created files bear no relationship to the original ones - no binary data structures are retained; the compression algorithm is always applied fresh upon the fully decoded original image and if you use different settings, the result is different. Moreover, since the initial compression artifacts become "valid pixels" once decoded, the successive compression has no way of knowing that they actually are "bad pixels" and those fine disturbances agfain result in different compression patterns. That is, after alll, why consecutive saves to JPEG will always degrade quality even at the best settings...
Mylenium

Lens models selectable for CR2 files, but not selectable for JPegs

Hi,
When applying the lens profile for CR2 images, Lightroom displays in extensive list of lens models to choose from. The list for CR2 images includes the Canon 18-200 IS lens that I use. However when developing a JPeg only image, the lens model list only displays about 20 canon lens models - which unfortunately doesn't include the Canon 18-200 IS lens. Any help appreciated to enable selecting the full list for jpeg only files?

What you're seeing is what's available. The lens profiles are for either jpg or raw, and there are fewer jpg profiles.
You could download Adobe's free utility that creates lens profiles and roll your own, or use the lens profile downloader that comes with the aforementioned creator to possibly download a profile for your lens created by another user (if one exists).
Hal

PSE11 Export of RAW files not sharp

I am using PS Elements 11 with raw converter 7.3, processing .DNG files from a Samsung GX-10 on a PC.
I notice that, despite sharpening the image in the raw converter, that the preview (F11) in the organiser is not sharp. This is somewhat annoying.
However, even more annoying is the fact that the blurriness continues if I export the DNG from the organiser to a new JPEG, even if I set the quality at Maximum (12). The export and preview seem to be ignoring the sharpness I have set in the raw converter.
If I open the .DNG in the editor and then save the file as a JPEG straight away, all my sharpening remains intact, and the final JPEG is fine.
I have tried using setting the 'process' in the raw converter to '2010', and also tried setting the JPEG preview size to 'Full Size' in the RAW converter save options. Neither of these seems to make any difference.
For my normal workflow I edit the .DNG files using the raw converter, using the PSE editor only when necessary. I then use the organiser to export the .DNG files to JPEGs for printing, emailing or whatever. This workflow does not give me the results I expect any more.
It looks like I am going to have to open every processed RAW image in the editor and then save the files as JPEGs individually. Also the organiser preview does not give me an accurate preview of the quality of the processed file.
Has anyone else observed this, or have any suggestions for a cure or a revised workflow?
Bill.

Jon,
Thanks for the response and the tips, but I am happy with the sharpening I am applying in camera raw itself, but the problem occurs when I click the 'Done' button to save the results to the organiser, and then subsequently export to a jpeg.
For an example, this is how an oversharpened test shot appears on the screen in ACR 7.3 at 100% zoom with sharpening set to 150 (via print screen)...
Click Done and then export from the organiser (max quality) and this is the blurry result that appears:
This is also the sort of view I get in the organiser preview (F11) even at 100%.
If instead of clicking Done in ACR, I click Open Image and then save the image as a JPEG, this is what I get:
This latter image is what I would be expecting. (Of course I wouldn't normally sharpen my images like that!) In fact the exported raw images are much softer than the JPEGs that come straight out of the camera.
Maybe I am doing something wrong, and I am quite happy to be corrected, but I have been sharpening my images with ACR in PSE10 quite happily for a year or more. Its only since PSE11 and ACR 7.3 that I have noticed this issue.
Regards,
Bill

Master sharper than Version?

In AP 2 I notice that if I view a Master in the Viewer that it appears much sharper than the untouched default Version. (I'm not using Quick preview BTW).
Just wonder why that should be, I would have thought that the default Version would be rendered the same as Master?
Edit:
(I'm talking about viewing the full image, not at 100% zoom).
Message was edited by: D Anderson

No idea. If the master is a RAW, it has to be interpreted via algorithms before rendering and then displayed. A TIFF/JPG etc master still has to be extracted from its file and (in the case of JPG decompressed) before rendering.
Yet a version is (or should be) exactly the same as NO IMAGE DATA exists within a file, merely a collection of rules to apply to the master. So with no RAW or other adjustments made, both images should be identical. Certainly I have never witnessed anything different.
Are you comparing side-by-side and seated square on to reduce effect of LCD panel? Have you tried creating a copy version from master using the menu pick?

Getting Canon S90 CR2 files off my iPad to my PC

Using the camera connection kit, I transferred a number of Canon S90 CR2 files to my iPad. That worked fine as it always does.
But how do I get them onto my PC?
Canon Camera Window says it does not find any "camera", when the iPad is plugged in.
Windows Live Photo Gallery and Windows Scanner and Camera Wizards do not recognise CR2 files.
Nikon Transfer finds jpeg and NEF files, but obviously not CR2 files.
Is there any trick I have missed, or any other software I should try?
The CR2 files display well on the iPad, and I can open them in for example Filterstorm to convert them to jpeg, but that is not really a solution long term.

I can confirm that this works with Lightroom 3.3 on a PC, with Canon CR2 files. On the iPad, use the camera connection kit to import your photos. Later, start Lightroom and connect your ipad to the PC. Start Import in Lightroom. The iPad will appear as a device (be patient) and you can then import as normal. Only Imported Folders and Saved Photo folders will appear.
A simpler way though is to connect your ipad to the PC and use Explorer. Quit iTunes. The iPad should be listed under Computer. Click on that, then Internal STORAGE, then DCIM. the folders listed with cryptic names such as 800AAAA are for Saved Photos, Current Import, etc.
You cannot see your synched photos, but then why would you want to?

HT1766 My itunes library is much bigger than what I have on my 64gb ipod touch, so I am on manual sync. I want to upgrade to Ios 5.1, and I have tried to use the backup ipod feature, but it only backed up a little bit of data, nowhere near 64gb. Will I lo

My itunes library is much bigger than the 64gb on my ipod touch, but I want to update the touch to ios5.1. I tried the ipod backuo funnction, but this only produced a small file, much smaller than 64gb. If I upgrade, will i lose all the music and books as currently constituted on the ipod touch?

The iPod backup that iTunes makes does not include synced media like apps and music.. See the following for what it contains.
iTunes: About iOS backups
- Transfer iTunes purchases:
iTunes Store: Transferring purchases from your iOS device or iPod to a computer
- Transfer other music by using a third-party program like one of those discussed here:
newer copy

When I save a photo as a jpeg in PE 13 the file size is much smaller than with PE 12. Why?

when I save a photo as a jpeg in PE 13 the file size is much smaller than with PE 12. Why?

Are the image all the same size the % files open into a document seems to vary with the number of pixels the image being opened has. Check the Image size.

ACR processing in CS6 much slower than CS5

A big advantage of hosting ACR in 64 bit CS5 vs in bridge was that then ACR would process multiple images at once when saving them to jpg which would reduce processing times by 30% or more. For some reason this doesn't seem to be the case with CS6. I just did a short test and CS6 won't process multiple images at once, and was 33% slower than CS5 at saving a batch of 5dmkii images to jpeg.
Has anyone else noticed this? Hopefully this limitation is due to beta status and the final release of ACR will be fully optimized for 64bit processing.

It seems strange that their is hardly any improvement in 64 bit cs6 speed vs 32 bit cs5.    I agree, gpu support for acr would great!
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:25:25 -0600
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: ACR processing in CS6 much slower than CS5
    Re: ACR processing in CS6 much slower than CS5
    created by Noel Carboni in Photoshop CS6 - View the full discussion
Bridge in CS5 was 32 bit only, and I observed the 32 bit converter as run by Bridge (or Photoshop 32 bit) wouldn't exercise all the cores, so the way I interpret your numbers is as follows:
1. ACR7 is 50% slower than its predecessor (34.25 seconds when run in Photoshop 64 bit vs. 22.59).
2. Bridge is now 64 bit, so you're running the same code in both cases, which is why you're seeing essentially the same number in Bridge as Photoshop.
-Noel
     Replies to this message go to everyone subscribed to this thread, not directly to the person who posted the message. To post a reply, either reply to this email or visit the message page: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4328297#4328297
     To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at http://forums.adobe.com/message/4328297#4328297. In the Actions box on the right, click the Stop Email Notifications link.
     Start a new discussion in Photoshop CS6 by email or at Adobe Forums
For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to http://forums.adobe.com/message/2936746#2936746.

I moved my music from the c drive to the d drive. All of my music is in itunes but my ipod won't sync with itunes. The syncing process is taking much longer than usual too. I left my ipod over night to sync and it didnt finish. Fails to sync every time.

I moved my music from the c drive to the d drive. All of my music is in itunes but my ipod won't sync with itunes. The syncing process is taking much longer than usual too. I left my ipod over night to sync and it didnt finish. Fails to sync every time. I tried to restore my ipod and it didnt help.

Ignore. I figured it out:)

In PSE 13, when I open a folder, jpeg files have a preview image, but PSD, DNG and CR2 files don't. Also, no thumbnail below the file list.

Working in PSE 13, when I open a folder, jpeg files have a preview image, but psd files just have white sheet of paper as preview. I have to open the file to be able to see it. Also, there is no thumbnail of the file below the file list.Surely, there's a setting that needs to be changed. I did not have this problem with Elements 12. This is a real bother because I have to use Lightroom to see all the file types. It seems as if Elements is using the standard Windows file loader that can't show previews of file types it doesn't know including .PSD, DNG and CR2. Is that a bug or did I do something wrong? Thanks for any help.

I am using Windows 7 64 bits. Working in the editor, I never use the organizer. The screen above is not the same at all that I got in Elements 12, it was completely different and showed me a thumbnail below the listing when I single clicked on one of the files. In Elements 12, I also could see a thumbnail of all the file types, not only the jpegs. It is as if the loader is the regular Windows used anywhere, not the right one for Elements. I hope someone understands my problem.. Thanks.
Mike

Why is menu size so much larger than the files?

I am somewhat perplexed - I'm making a single-layer dvd and have a simple single screen theme (no animation) - it has one drop zone. The movie has 28 chapters so there are five of them, but so far I've added only one montage of photos to each menu page - it's a "mobile" quality in media browser and ave only 10 - 20 MB, then one song. On average these movie clips are 1:00 to 2:00 min long and the music is cut to that length. So, all told, it's probably less than 110 MB in files - but when I look at the project properties, the menus are 3301 MB!!!
The movie itself is only 1.1 GB so what is going on?
It's preventing me from doing the project and I've got no idea why it's making the menu size so much larger than the file sizes?
Can you please help me figure out what to do?
Alexa

The 2 min clips were natively 2 min - I had each one separate and actually converted to media browser in "mobile" size (b/c the drop zone was 4 x 6 in size in the theme). They were tiny - in most cases I was shortening the audio (e.g. the song was 4 minutes and I was setting the loop to only 1:30 b/c that's how long the video clip was on the menu).
BUT, to resolve the question (I always like to post the answer) - I ended up duplicating the project to try to reimport the video. It was a fresh iDVD project and I happened to click on the project tree of screens - and, lo and behold, the ENTIRE menu was duplicated for some reason (and the movie, actually). I went back to the original and it was the same! I have no idea how that would happen do you? It only had one main menu screen - and then an entire duplicate menu - which I wouldn't even know how to access if I didn't see it in the project menu tree?
The only think of is that at one point I added a title menu link to the scene selection - it gave me a warning that my menu was more than 12 minutes, did I want to fix or ignore and fix later - which confused me b/c it was under 12 min, then but I clicked ignore. Does that create an alternate title menu and send people back to something else?
Anyway, I deleted the entire extra scene selection menus (5 of them) and it was back to under 4 GB.
So, I was able to burn, but still wondering about creating the "title menu" link on scene selections? It drives me crazy that it doesn't automatically do that so I like to add "main menu" links.
Thanks for your help!
Alexa

Why are 'saved as' .psd files so much bigger than original raw nef files?

I was under the impression that original raw files were the biggest possible. I appear to be very wrong. Why are 'saved as' .psd files so much bigger than original raw nef files?
I'm beginning to think that saving them as psd is a bad idea.
Yes, though I've heard all the arguments of keepng the original raw files (For ex. Did you throw away the negatives when you were using film) I se eno purpose in keeping them. Once I've made the initial adjustments--cropping, color correction etc. I don't feel a need to ever go back and never do. Most of my work is done in Photoshop and I like it that way--but suddenly finding myself with such huge files doesn't appeal to me at all--and other formats like tif...well never mind for now.

Good point made c.pfaffenbichler however, my thinking is this--there is time spent on the raw file and then there is much more time spent on (usually a psd) the file once in Photoshop. For me to then go back to the orignal raw file, after having worked on it on PS would mean getting rid of all the work (larger amount of work, time wise and artistic wise) done on PS which seems pointless. Although the psd file does show your layers and stuff it only shows the end results of that layer. It does not show from where to where you pointed your brush, from what point to what point you changed the color or part of an image etc. etc.Anyhow I understand why most people keep their raw files, but this is the main reason why I do not. It would mean hours of work on an image you already worked on (and usually were satisfied with) to perhaps make some minor alteration. Also please note that though I was noce a pro photog, no I do it mostly for fun. Getting the exact red in my Coca Cola can has never been of importance. On the other hand, if there were a way of working on a raw file within Photoshop and keep it (save it as) a raw file equivalent, then I would absolutely do so.

CR2 files much sharper than processed jpegs

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for