Exported JPGs in 2.7 are 3x size of Camera Raw

I have a Canon 5DMarkII and I noticed that the exported jpgs from full size RAW files are 17-25 MB whereas the same file in Camera Raw saves as about a 6-7 MB file. I have the LR export set to export JPG files with sRGB color space. When I take a jpg straight from the camera it's only 6-7 MB. Does anyone know what my problem is? Thanks.

No image resize. .... Sharpen STD for screen.
If you don't resize, you probably shouldn't use output sharpening. The screen sharpen is mostly to counteract the softening effect of downsizing your image. Apart from that, at full size, it will likely mostly emphasize noise and therefore increase your filesize. Just optimize the capture sharpening in Develop (make sure to optimize the masking parameter, which will cut down in noise in areas such as skies)  so that your image looks good at 1:1 and then don't apply extra sharpening in the export. At ISO 400, you also might want to add a touch of noise reduction. With the switch from 2.6 to 2.7, the demosaic algorithm changed and now includes less noise reduction in the demosaic stage, so in 2.7 most images are going to show a little more noise with the default settings. Jpeg compression efficiency is very sensitive to noise and often you can correlate the filesize directly with the amount of noise in the image for equal quality settings.

Similar Messages

  • When are we getting the Camera Raw plug-in version 7?

    When are we getting the Camera Raw plug-in version 7 to export from Lightroom 4 to Photoshop CS5?

    well imo that is nick picking.. as i payed for the same ACR 7 functionality when i bought LR 4.
    it´s just to annoy the customers enough to make them upgrade photoshop too.
    you can twist and turn it .. in the end it is a great leverage for adobe to push people into buying a new photoshop version.
    customer support is something different.. at least in my view.
    imho ACR should come with LR. so no matter what PS version you have they will be compatible.
    ACR is a plugin it should be possible from the technical viewpoint.  i work with way more complicated plugins in 3D max and when i buy one i normaly get different builds that work for the latest 3-4 program versions.
    but as jeff schewe wrote in another thread, for adobe it is a lot of work with zero benefit (income).
    they make AE compatible with 3D max. but to get full support between adobe products.....
    . But then you're really talking about new ACR functionality, which you don't want to pay for.

  • In bridge i select a jpg image with cntrl r to open in camera raw but get "camera raw not avail"

    In bridge i select a jpg image with cntrl r to open in camera raw but get "camera raw not available"  camera raw editing requires that a qualifying product has been launched at least once to enable this feature.  I can open nef. in camera raw with no problem.

    Hm, what I suggested might actually be a possibility then...
    Close whatever version you have open first...
    I think Adobe installs shortcuts for both 32 and 64 bit Photoshop in the start menu.
    If you can't find the 32 bit Start menu entry, look for the 32 executable here (changing the CS version number to whatever yours is):
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS5\Photoshop.exe
    -Noel

  • Jpg vs raw file size PSE9/Camera raw 6.3

    It seems that there is quite a difference in jpg file sizes between converting jpg's Process multiple files (batch) or Save as (single photo).
    I'm converting Sony A580 arw files that are about 16xxxxKB each, when doing batch processing file sizes for jpg are larger than raw about 19xxxKB (setting jpg max quality) but when saving same photos Save as setting max quality 12 file sizes are about 14xxxKB.
    Has anyone noticed same behavior when using Camera raw 6.3 and PSE9  ?
    Edit:
    Ooops, I had Auto sharpen selected when I did batch processing.

    None of this is unusual, and I wouldn't worry about it at all.
    I would advise against saving quality 12, it gives you very large files but rarely if ever does it result in a noticeable quality improvement over level 9 or 10, which are smaller.
    If you want to read more about this, here is an excellent article written about Lightroom, but the concepts are the same (PSE uses a 0 to 12 scale, while Lightroom uses a 0 to 100 scale, but other than that, everything is the same for PSE). http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/jpeg-quality

  • Significant reduction in file size from Camera Raw to DNG

    Hi,
    I am currently testing the conversion of Leaf camera raw files into DNGs for a photographer's archive. I am hoping to convert all of the mos files to DNGs because Leaf Capture and the Leaf Raw Converter are not being updated and because the photographer wants to have an Adobe centered workflow. In my testing I discovered that converting mos files to DNGs through ACR 8.4 and LightRoom 5.4 resulted in a reduction of file size by nearly 50%. A 44.5MB mos file became a 23.6MB DNG. From what I've read only about 15-20% of the camera raw file should be lost and all of the data lost should be propietary.
    Here-in lies my quesiton, is there any way that I can track or determine exactly what sort of compression is being done to the mos file and what information is or is not travelling in the conversion to DNG?
    These are the settings I have used for converting raw files to DNGs:
    ACR:
    JPEG Preview: Medium Size
    Embed fast load data
    Don't use lossy compression
    Preserve pixel counts
    Don't embed original
    LIGHTROOM 5.4:
    Only Convert Raw files
    Delete originals after successful conversion
    File Extension DNG
    Compatibility Camera Raw 7.1 and later
    Jpeg Preview Medium Size
    Embed Fast Load Data
    Thanks!

    50%? - I thought we were talking about 15-20%?
    In my first post I questioned why I was seeing a reduction in file size of 50% when according to forums and articles I've read I should only be seing a 15-20% reduction in file size. I then wondered what data I might be losing, which you addressed.
    Same as what? - what were the results.
    I was referring to testing I preformed on camera raw files produced during different years (all mos). I converted all files with the same ACR and LR settings and found that the DNGs always reflected a 50% reduction in file size. This test suggests that any conversion issues is not necessarily related to how the camera raw files might have been differently built across years.
    Adobe's raw data compression is touted by DNG zealots, but I haven't scrutinized it enough to corroborate or refute.., but my experience is that reduction is relatively marginal. All of this assumes original is also compressed - if uncompressed in original source, savings would be large.
    The files I am dealing with are definitely uncompressed which could account for the large reduction in file size. I didn't realize until I posted to this thread that converting to a DNG results in a compression of the original image data. I understand that this compression is supposed to be lossless like a lossless compression to a tiff and thus result in no decrease in image quality or harm to the original image. I am baffled by how it is possible that any compression of a file (especially  by 50%) could not result in a loss of important data but I will accept that it is possible to have a truly lossless compression and that the size reduction I am seeing could be a result of all of the different processes a file undergoes that you have outlined.
    I looked into the effects that backwards compatibility has on the conversion process which might interest you http://dpbestflow.org/DNG#backwards-compatibility
    I also posted to luminous landscape's forums http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=89101.new;topicseen#new
    Although it wouldn't surprise me if the DNG conversion process tossed the xmp-like metadata, and kept the original stuff, but it would surprise me if it tossed the original stuff - but as I said before, I haven't scrutinized for completeness so I don't know.
    I've done testing in which I converted .mos camera raw files with their sidecar xmps and without their sidecar xmps. My tests revealed that the DNG definitely carries over xmp metadata although it is not clear to me exactly how it is carried and if anything is lost.

  • Nikon D3s RAW files are underexposed by Lightroom / Camera RAW

    I'm used to shot RAW files only.
    I recently bought a D3s, alongside with my D700 and I noticed D3s files were darker than D700 ones, by about 1/2 or even 2/3 stop. Initially I thought the problem was one of the cameras, but after some tests I found the problem is my RAW converter. Infact this happens only with NEF (RAW) files, and if I shot a RAW+JPG image, the D3s RAW file opened in Lightroom 4 (or Camera RAW) is underexposed if compared with its JPG on-camera version.
    I think no camera setting is affecting this behaviour. I reset either the D3s and the D700. No D-Lighting is set on-camera. This happens only with the D3s and only with Camera RAW and Lightroom.
    Other RAW converters display the D3s RAW file correctly exposed, the same as its JPG version, and the same as the D700 RAW and JPG. I tested so far Capture One, DxO Pro Optics and Raw Therapee.
    Color profile used is custom, but I tried using Adobe Standard and the result is the same.
    Default develop settings affect only color profile and sharpening, and I got the same problem on a fresh new installation of Lightroom where no default develop settings are set.
    If anybody with a D3s can check if his NEFs are underexposed if compared to their JPG versions when opened in LR or Camera RAW, I would appreciate that much.
    Any idea about the origins of my problem would be great.
    Thank you.

    alessandroavenali wrote:
    I know, DdeGannes, but a different rendition of 2 pro cameras at the same settings is a bit frustrating.
    Would it be better to underexpose the D700 while shooting, or setting a default -0,5EV on every imported picture, if the problem goes on?
    Moreover, seems the Nikon D3s ISOs need to be pushed +2/3 to obtain the same exposure as the D700 in LR workflow. So the advantage of this great sensor could be lost.
    I'd like to know more about D700 and D3s rendition comparison in LR/ACR at same settings.
    It's not unusual for two camera bodies of even the same exact make and model to have Exposure differences of up to 1/3 EV, which is very noticeable. Ditto for  White Balance differences. For Example:
    Camera 1 is +1/3 EV and Camera 2 is -1/3 EV = 2/3 EV Difference
    Camera 1 White Balance is -500KTemp and Camera 2 is +500K Temp = 1000K Difference
    Tack on minor differences between the LR Camera Profiles and it will get much worse if heading in opposite directions, as above.
    The only way to compare the raw NEF files from two cameras is to use a RAW converter that applies NO profiles, NO Gamma Correction, or any other modifications to the raw pixel data. See may post here for information on 'Rawnalyze:'
    http://forums.adobe.com/message/3952812#3952812
    You can download it here:
    http://dave-anderson-photo.com/files/software/Rawnalyze/Rawnalyze_2.10.4.0.zip
    Online manual here:
    http://www.oitregor.com/numeric/Rawnalyze/Rawnalyse_doc/datas/RawnalyzeGuide.htm
    None of the external links in the manual work, but nothing to worry about. If you have any questions on how to use it let me know.
    I believe the Nikon D700, D3, and D3s cameras are supported in Rawnalyze 2.10.4.0. If not you can convert the NEF to DNG.

  • How to: DNG colors from pentax camera are completely different in camera raw compared to pentax soft

    Hi all, i have a problem.
    I always used adobe camera raw to manage RAW files. I find it really fast and friendly compared to many other programs (i mean lightroom, pentax digital camera utility, DxO optics pro, Silkypix, etc.). It has no rivals, on my macbook pro it is absolutely faster than others.
    BUT i found a lot of differences comparing colors (not just tone, but definition inside an object with similar colors) from a DNG using camera raw vs pentax digital camera utility 4. It is a know problem by pentax people. You can check (without the camera) the problem here (see the colorcheker chart): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/page14.asp
    I can post examples of what i mean speaking of "definition inside an object with similar colors"...
    I always use the "embedded" camera profile in camera raw, finding it more similar to the pentax software. The adobe standard is really different.
    Is there a way i can bypass this issue? using pentax digital software is really boring…it's unfriendly, SLOW, with bad light adjustments and interface.
    I tried opening the DNG with pentax software and converting it to tiff: the colors are ok, but you lose a lot adjusting light etc.
    thank you all

    > I don't know anything, and haven't read anything, about the unique characteristics of Pentax DNG files.
    firmware in cameras that can create raw files in .DNG format (Pentax, Samsung, Ricoh, Leica) will write so called DNG profile in those raw files (see Sandy's comments) - those profiles are not identical to what Adobe creates to use w/ ACR/LR, but they also can be used by Adobe raw converters (you will get a little different colors)... you can extract those profiles from native DNG raw files for example using Adobe DNG profile editor... in addition, Pentax cameras (modern) can create raw files either in their own PEF format or in DNG format and Pentax suppied software (DCU) can in fact create DNG files from PEF files and unlike Adobe DNG converter DCU will do that w/o discarding any information and it will write Pentax DNG profile in those converted DNG files.

  • My images are going from from camera raw to totally white in Photoshop CS6, I am using a Mac computer.

    I am using Photoshop CS6 and my images are opening up totally white from camera raw into photoshop.
    I am using a Mac. Just recently switched from PC to raw, and never had this problem.

    Is everything up to date?

  • Canon CR2 raw images are forcibly cropped by Camera Raw

    I posted this on the Photoshop Discussion as I did not realise that Camera Raw has its own - sorry folks!
    Camera raw is cropping my cr2 images even after I have removed the crop in DPP (Digital Photo Professional - Canon's own raw editing software). I have many images cropped by a Canon 5D3 as it forces a 16:9 crop when you take a still while in video mode. The rest of the data is in the raw file, but this is not read by Camera Raw which forces the 16:9 crop. I have removed the crops in DPP, and even re-cropped with a different crop, saved the files and used every way I can imagine to get them into PS short of turning them into tiffs. I do not want to save as a tiff, as I really like the tools in PS Raw, especially the exposure tool (I am no great photographer but I have some very special and irreplaceable pics form fieldwork overseas which are ahem errr not quite correctly exposed).
    My ideal worflow is open folder in DPP - star rate the pics I want to work on. crop them (nice to do this in DPP as it is part of the selection process) then get them into Camera Raw without any more effort, then if an image can be tweaked - do it as a Raw, if it needs more work - get it into PS6 as a tiff and go from there. This seems to minimise effort and minimise file space, at the expense of having two different file types.
    Does anyone else work like this, or is there a better way to review 300 similar pics and get the best selected and processed? Has anyone else encounteres this refusal of Camera Raw to ignore the camera's crop? I bleive that there is a plug-in for lightroom, does anyone know a work around for PS  - I have PS6 with raw 7.3.
    Thanks
    Gor

    Oh can I, thanks . I couldn't see a way to open a tiff in ACR - It only opens when I drag a Raw image into ps6, and it has no file>open to allow me to open a tiff.  In fact it is a rather strange piece of software - it doesn't seem to exist on its own (not as part of production suite anyway).
    This would be a work-around for sure if you could tell me how to do it??
    UPDATE
    FOr anyone else with this problem you can force ps6 to open all tiffs in ACR with a setting in preferences in RAW - automatically open all tiffs. It is still a bit of a pain as i dont really want to automatically open them all, but hey!

  • Changing brush size in camera raw?

    I'm having trouble with changing brush size in the camera raw brush tools.
    What I use for input is a scandinavian keyboard and I have to type in alt gr+8 and alt gr+9 instead of brackets.
    This works great in Photoshop,  but sadly not in Camera Raw.
    Is anyone able to help me?

    That works well, thanks for this.
    Any idea why the brush sizing feature is not similar to Lightroom where you can simply scroll vertically on the Magic Mouse?
    Cheers,

  • Digital photo professional - export JPG from RAW

    Hello!
    i have a problem with program Digital photo professional, when i want export images from RAW format to JPG.
    The problem is, that quality of image is much more worse, then in RAW format in DPP. JPG looks blurred and fuzzy.
    IMAGE LINK:
    Please check image, on the left side is print screen from RAW in DPP, on the right is exported JPG from DPP.
    I want export JPG with the same quality as i see in RAW
    Is there anybody to help me?
    Thanks a lot.
    Vit

    1. open *.CR2 (raw file) in DPP
    2.file/convert and save
    3.type of file - EXif JPEG (JPG, JPEG)
    4.image quality 10
    5.output resolution 350dpi
    6.check -  embed icc profile in image
    There are not another settings, so i dont know, why has exported JPG so bad quality...
    When i open *.CR2 file in PS5, i see the same bad quality as exported JPG from DPP, but i read, that PS5, cannot
    open CR2 file in best quality, because PS5 doesnt have all function, that have DPP.
    I tested it on two PC, so problem is not only on my PC...
    Thanks.

  • Why are the jpgs that are generated in my camera better than the ones i create from the nef file in camera raw?

    i shoot raw+ jpg in camera, for some reason the jpgs that come from my camera (nikon D300) always seem better than the jpgs i create
    from the nef files in camera raw. i am saving at the highest quality. the jpgs from the camera seem to have more detail in highlights
    better color more vibrant, sharper. could my camera be doing some enhancements to the jpgs before processing?

    I had similar thoughts back when I first started shooting raw. Really, it's just a matter of editing to your personal taste.
    Yes, that camera applies lots of presets before creating the jpeg, as Trevor.Dennis mentioned. Also, as he said, you can far surpass native jpegs with raw.
    If you need it more vibrant, make it so. If you need to bring down the highlights, do so. Need sharpening? Apply some.
    Here is one of my edits that I made a tutorial of: Sunrise Raw File Edit - Adobe Lightroom - Landscape Photography - YouTube. It is one of my less dramatic edits, but still a good one.
    I don't want to clutter this thread with links, but if you take a look at my Facebook page, I put a lot of before and afters up in January and February. A Google search for Benjamin Root Photography will bring it up.
    I shoot in raw, and highly recommend it.
    I'll leave you with a nice NEF RAW file before and after:
    BTW, D300 is a nice camera, I've used it...
    Benjamin

  • Camera Raw won't open certain JPG files from Bridge, others open in ACR with no problem.

    Edit: This was orignally posted in the Photoshop > Macintosh forum, which I failed to realize was read only. Thanks to a PM headsup, I'm reposting it here. Thanks
    I've searched the internet and the Adobe forums and cannot find a direct answer to what I'm dealing with.
    The issue I am having is that Bridge CS5 (current version 4.0.5.11) will open some JPG images in Raw with no problem and others nothing happens at all. All the images come from the same source (Fujifilm Frontier SP2000) so I really don't understand why Bridge ignores some of them as being openable in RAW. For example, say this roll of film has 36 images. If I "Select All", right click, and select "Open in Camera Raw", it will open whichever it deems acceptable in RAW and nothing happens at all to the others (The RAW dialog will, for instance, only open 10 images instead of all 36, and the remaining images are not altered in any way).
    I've made sure that Photoshop is prefering Adobe Camera Raw with Supported Raw Files and in Camera Raw Preferences I have the box ticked to Automatically open JPGs with Settings but nothing helps.
    My work around is to one file at a time in the Photoshop Open dialog, selecting an affected JPG file and have it open them as Camera Raw instead of Jpeg.
    Any ideas? It's done this for quite a while and I have no idea how to fix it.
    Thanks.
    Cary

    Cary,
    It could be an insufficient memory problem.  Please supply details about your machine.
    Please read this FAQ for advice on how to ask your questions correctly for quicker and better answers: 
    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/419981?tstart=0
    Also, please note that the Camera Raw forum is here:
    http://forums.adobe.com/community/cameraraw
    Thanks!
    Wo Tai Lao Le
    我太老了

  • Camera Raw file size

    I have accidently noticed that Camera Raw's files size nearly doubled between 6.4 and 6.5. Not that I care about a few megs of lost disk space, but what little secrets are there hidden? I don't remember any major new features being added.
    P.S. I have not been around for a good couple of months, so maybe I missed something.

    No, I said "no new features" in ACR 6.5, but a big jump in file size.
    Camera Raw.8bi is 11.9 MB for version 6.4
    Camera Raw.8bi is 19.0 MB for version 6.5
    Remember how ACR 5.7 had no UI for editing PV2010 adjustments, but could interpret it to assure some compatibility of the old Photoshop CS4 with the new process? At first, I thought maybe it's the same thing here: there's some code in ACR 6.5 for PV2012 interpretation. But seems a bit unlikely, given that it was released about 5 month ago and PV2012 is still considered unfinished in LR4.
    Then I thought it has something to do with fixing the dreaded "hue shift when using Recovery" issue. But that was fixed in 6.4 already. (BTW, how come this went unnoticed, without any mention of it in release notes? This was a huge problem for some images and fixing also caused a major difference in rendering of some images, thus braking backward compatibility.)
    But I don't believe that the sudden doubling of ACR file size is an accident either.

  • Camera Raw 8.6 oder 8.7  Bild Speichern nur als .dng möglich nicht mehr als .jpg ?

    Gibt es keine möglichkeit in Camera Raw ein Bild asl JPG zu speichern?
    Gruss
    PMK55

    In Elements, the camera raw module is used to send the converted and edited image to the editor (command 'Open'). From the editor you can edit, convert to any picture format (jpeg, tiff, psd...) and print your pictures. The 'save' option is reall an option to 'convert' to the DNG raw format.
    You can also use the 'process multiple files' command in the File menu of the editor to batch convert raw files to jpeg, or use the 'export' command in the organizer.

Maybe you are looking for