RAW looking like JPEG

I shoot with a Canon 30D and I have shot RAW to this point. My question is, is it possible to have a preset of processing options for lightroom that would render my RAW file to look like it was a JPEG. From this point I could continue to process is as I see fit (from the "jpeg" point of view).
I imagine someone has asked this question as well.... and maybe it's a simple response, but an answer would be greatly appreciated, and save me a lot of time!
I am currently using Lightroom 2.7 64bit on an iMac
Thanks!
- Dave

Hi Dave
You need to experiment with your develop settings and save your favorite as a pre-set.
You can then apply the pre-set automatically as your starting point for all raw files when importing images into Lightroom.
Using raw will always give the greatest tonal range for post processing but some photographers are happy to shoot in high quality Jpeg and then rely on the camera for compression and processing. Sports and action photographers tend to rely on the advantages of Jpeg as the huge size of raw files does not permit a high camera burst rate when writing to a storage card.

Similar Messages

  • Getting RAW look like the embedded JPEG

    This has been asked before, but I can't find the answer, so I will ask
    again.
    How do I get Lightroom to make the RAW file START it's adjustments with
    the full in-camera adjustment settings, so the RAW initially looks
    somewhat like it would if I had just shot JPEG?
    When processing Canon RAW images (we use a mix of 10D, 20D and 5D
    bodies), the initial 'unadjusted' image sometimes (often) looks VERY
    different from the camera adjusted JPEG of the same photo. The reason
    for the difference is that the JPEG has the camera adjustments applied,
    but the RAW doesn't. You don't need to shoot RAW+JPEG to see the effect,
    because the embedded preview in the RAW file is an adjusted JPEG, and
    many programs use that to display previews.
    The problem is that sometimes the JPEG looks darn nice because the
    camera did a pretty darn good job processing the photo, but the RAW
    looks flat, bland and lifeless. And it takes a whole lot of futzing
    around to get it to look 'as good' as the dumbed down in-camera JPEG.
    So is there some setting that I'm missing that reads in the full
    'as-shot' settings of the camera, and correlates them to initial
    settings for the RAW? It would be nice to be able to just tweak the
    image from that point forward.

    >Obviously cameras can vary in the particular model range, so doing the For (or similar) calibration will be specific to your camera.
    Since the output of the default JPEG rendering pipeline of current DSLRs is anything but calorimetrically accurate (it is designed to be pleasant, not to be used in a metrology laboratory), calibrating for accuracy is going to do little to make LR RAW output and in-camera JPEG processing come closer.
    And while the current incarnation of LR provides significant control over color, I still think it is not sufficient to reproduce some of the effects used in OEM RAW developers and in-camera JPEG processing.
    In particular, I am not convinced it is possible to reproduce Canon's handling of reds within LR using presets that would reproduce canon "Normal" picture style.

  • A lightroom preset to produce a RAW conversion that always looks like the camera-processed JPG?

    Hi,
    Any tips on how to make a Lightroom preset that will render the RAW file in a manner that looks remotely the same as the picture displayed when shot?
    I'm not talking about camera calibration > camera standed, portrait etc.
    With Lightrooms clunky default adjustments the histogram looks correct; i.e. the way it did when it was shot. The image also looks horrible; clipped blacks, too contrasty etc. because it arbitrarily boosts Brightness +50, Contrast +25
    When I zero the settings the histogram shifts completely away from the way it was shot, as if it was underexposed, which is not correct. I've tested this with perfect exposures using a GMB colour chart.
    I guess the camera is showing me a histogram of the JPEG after it has been processed.
    Is there a quantifiable way to replicate this other than playing with the sliders until the RAW roughly matches the JPG and then saving the preset?
    Thanks.
    Update - I'm using a Canon 5DMkII and a 1DsMkII

    Good grief. When I photograph a color chart, under controlled lighting conditions, exposed perfectly, that is what I want to see as the default RAW conversion, with acurate values. In fact with camera calibrations that is pretty much how it works. It's not open to interpretation. Blacks have a certain value, neutral 8, neutral 6.8 etc.
    If not, then give me the tools to accomplish this quickly. In Photoshop I can shoot a scene under controlled lighting, shoot a color chart in the first frame, create a custom curve and apply this to every subsequent shot. There is a rough way to do this in LR but it's quite a backward step.
    THEN I can have a filed day, changing whatever I want, but I do not like randomly dragging sliders until it "looks ok". I stopped doing that my first year of Photoshop when I learned how to use the color sampler correctly.
    "If you shoot raw (as opposed to JPEG) then YOU have the power and capability to decide what stuff is supposed to look like. "
    I understand I have the power to decide what stuff looks like. Nothing I have said so far argues against this. I'm asking for an accurate baseline, from which I can let my creativity run wild.
    " I encourage people to ignore the LCD and go with your guts", "If you are lazy and don't want to be bothered rendering the scene, yes, I can understand why you would want somebody else to control the interpretation of the scene"
    The LCD and the histogram are a quick way of evaluating correct exposure for a shot, so that blacks are not clipped and highlights are not blown out and lost forever. They are standard TOOLs of modern photography. To not use them is illogical. It would be like instructing people not to use the camera's inbuilt light meter, because it's "more creative" without it.
    It does not have to be one extreme or the other. People seem to be saying "reject the jpg - it means nothing. Let the artist in you decide" and yet they blithely accept the default settings Lightroom gives. My point is, the camera rendering is a good REFERENCE POINT, far more accurate to what you saw on the day, and far more relevant, than LR's adjustments.
    Once I have an accurate rendering, quickly, THEN I can be creative and enjoy the power and flexibility of RAW. If nothing else, it's a much faster way to work.

  • I recently upgraded to iOS 8. Looks like the pics I had in my messages are no longer appearing as pictures, rather they are appearing as JPEG files (not broken jpegs). I need to get these pics. Can't figure out how to do it. I'm on an iPhone 5C.

    I recently upgraded to iOS 8. Looks like the pics I had in my messages are no longer appearing as pictures, rather they are appearing as JPEG files (not broken jpegs). I need to get these pics. Can't figure out how to do it. I'm on an iPhone 5C.
    I've tried resetting my phone, looking for the pics in the new 'deleted' folder. I tried forwarding the jpegs to sees if they'll appear in a new message (but turnout the phone won't let me forward these pics). Apple is trying to say it's the 30 day reason, but I know that is not the problem. ALl of my pics older than 30 days were viewable. It is the upgrade that screwed this up. Help! Important pics!

    Try this to learn about using keys:
    http://www.apple.com/support/macbasics/
    You can also use your PC mouse.
    As for iPhoto, it sounds like you were trying to move files around in the library. That is a bib no-no in Aperture or iPhoto.

  • Creative cloud quit, says "download again" and still no joy, same message.  Camera raw gone, Existing Lightroom and PS-12 won't talk.  What's up?  Looks like Creative Cloud trial botched up something. iMac

    Creative cloud quit, says "download again" and still no joy, same message.  Camera raw gone, Existing Lightroom 4.3 and PS-12 won't talk.  What's up?  Looks like Creative Cloud trial botched up something. iMac
    Tried a number of "fixes" from blogs.  No joy.  Deleted all my adobe apps, rebooted, and Creative Cloud says it needs to reload.  Went through that process, and it quit near the end, saying it needed to reload and directed me back to same Adobe site.  Hmm.  Round and round we go.  How do I get off of this loop and get my Adobe Lightroom and PS working fine again?  Whole episode started after loading CC and then PS said it didn't have Camera Raw.  Went and downloaded that, wouldn't load and said I needed Adobe Download Diagnostic (or something like that) went to suggested link, whereupon it tells me it is no loger available. 
    Looking forward to cleaning everything off and starting over!!  Any input gratefully accepted and I will NOT be trying CC again.  I am sure it is just fine, just not for me, now. 
    David Balcaen

    I forgot to write down my computer specs:
    iMac 27 Mid 2011
    2.7 GHz Intel Core i5
    4 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
    AMD Radeon HD 6770M 512 MB
    OS X 10.9.2

  • In FINDER, the IMAGES section of 'All My FIles', what is: myDocuments.cannedSearch?  Looks like images of jpegs & PDFs I viewed, even if I had deleted it.

    I previously posted a similar question, but I was not clear in my message. I know that files (categorized as PDF Documents, Movies, Presentations, Spreadsheets, etc.) in "all my files' in the FINDER are all my files and if I delete them, I am deleting the original copies.  However, the IMAGES category has thousands of images of PDF and jpeg files, even ones I had deleted.  I do not have thousands of pics or pdf documents.  It looks like these images are files I had opened, even if I deleted the files.  I want to clean up files on MAC.  Any suggestions?   See info below regarding IMAGES category of ALL MY FILES.  When I clic on INFO, it says it is a saved query.

    I actually just noticed the "media" option is no longer listed along the left side of Finder. I think that is where I accessed iphoto and my other picture folder.
    There is no media option in the Finder. That only turns up in Open... Dialogues like this:

  • How do i make a jpeg flag look likes its waving

    i have a jpeg of a specific flag that i am trying to make it a loop. whats does it take to make the jpeg look like its waving in the wind? The only thing i have successfully done is put a ripple dissolve across the whole thing and it looks like... well, i put a ripple effect on the flag. any advice?

    Library > Filters > Distortion Filters > Wave is the one you want if working in Motion. From the User manual:
    Wave
    Distorts the object to simulate waves oscillating across it. The wave filter is not automatically animated, but you can animate the Offset parameter to animate the effect of waves causing the image to undulate.
    Parameters in the Inspector
    Amplitude: Sets the amplitude of the waves. Values range from 0 to 100.
    Wavelength: Sets the length of the waves. Values range from 1 to 100.
    Offset: Sets the offset of the wave, with values ranging from –500 to 500.
    Vertical: Toggles whether the waves run vertically or horizontally.
    Repeat Edges: Toggles whether or not the edges of the object are repeated.
    Dashboard controls
    The Dashboard contains the Amplitude, Wavelength, Offset, and Vertical controls.

  • Hi, I just downloaded a bunch of RAW files into Lightroom 5.6 and they all look like they've been put through acid. Can someone please help? TYVM!

    Hi, I just downloaded a bunch of RAW files into Lightroom 5.6 and they all look like they've been put through acid. Can someone please help? TYVM!

    Jim and Rob, thank you for taking your time to respond. I have a mac & a pc with 4 gigs of RAM in each. I originally experienced the problem on my mac and afterwards the same thing happened on the pc. I shoot with a canon 5d mark iii and never had this problem before, but what I'm realizing is that I'm running out of space on both the mac & the pc. After an afternoon of shooting today, I filled up a 32-gig card, so my TB hard drives are filling up ridiculously fast. I need to drop some load off both drives and reboot. Hope this will resolve the issue as I really don't think it's a canon-LR problem (I'm using the most updated 5.6 version). Again, thanks for your input. I'll keep you posted.

  • Like most professional photographers, I shoot and edit in RAW rather then JPEG. Is Photos app going to allow me to use the RAW format?

    Like most professional photographers, I shoot and edit in RAW rather then JPEG. Is the Photos app going to allow me to use the RAW format?
    iMac with 3TB drive and 32 GIG of RAM. Three DROBO storage systems for data and backup.

    Try the alternatives, or wait for reports by the users who already migrated. For example, Capture One is more similar to Aperture than Lightroom:
    http://www.cnet.com/news/phase-ones-updated-image-editor-throws-apple-aperture-u sers-a-lifeline/
    http://www.photographybay.com/2014/10/01/capture-one-pro-8-unveiled-features-app le-aperture-migrate-option/
    I'll keep my main libraries in Aperture, as long as it compatible with the operating system.  If that no longer works, I'll start a new main library with digikam. If there is no native Mac application, that offers what I need for my workflow, I'll switch back to open source software.

  • Aperture 3 with Nikon D90 - How should raw fine tuning look like?

    I try to trouble shoot my Aperture 3 (trial) installation. I have some troubles with the raw fine tuning controls and after reading the manual (again) I noticed that the fine tuning controls I get for my D90 are different from the ones displayed in the manual.
    I get boost, hue boost / sharpening, edges / moire, radius, noise-reduction sliders.
    In the manual there is no noise-reduction slider, just a check box for Auto Noise Compensation.
    I got that control in Aperture 2, but not in Aperture 3. Now I’m wondering if something went wrong with my Aperture 3 installation. That would explain the problems I have with raw fine tuning. But before I try a complete clean install of my Mac i would like to know if I get the right raw fine tuning controls in Aperture 3.
    Does anybody use Aperture 3 and a Nikon D90 and could tell me how the raw fine tuning controls he gets in Aperture 3 look like?
    Thanks.

    Greetings, First be sure you have your d7100 properly set to take maximum detail NEF images.
    Go to your d7100 shooting menu and choose NEF (Raw) recording > Type
    Choose N Lossless Compressed
    Then go to NEF (RAW) Recording > NEF (RAW) Bit depth
    Choose 14 bits
    You were given good advice that you should not mess with the raw fine tuning brick in Aperture 3.6
    Your d7100 has a default RAW import preset - make sure you have somehow not changed that Apple Aperture coded
    raw fine tuning preset - this could make all your images far less sharp on import. You can easily revert to the Aperture 3.6 raw import brick default for the d7100 if you have somehow changed it by error. And always be sure to use your Aperture loupe or full screen viewer when applying any adjustment bricks.
    Finally be sure that you understand the differences between the Sharpen adjustment and the Edge Sharpen adjustment. Both of these are very sensitive and very different sharpening tools. I do not shoot with a d7100, but use other Nikon FX DSLR's and I have never felt that any of my NEF imports lacked either Sharpness or Edge Sharpness given the Apple Aperture default raw image digital converters for each particular Nikon body. Good luck.

  • Why do my raws look different when I view them in Adobe Bridge/Adobe Camera Raw and Canons Digital P

    Hello all,
    I am sorta new to taking Raw photographs and I have been been using Adobe Bridge/Camera Raw to edit. When I take my photos (I am using a Canon t2i) I have it set to save a raw and a jpg. When I view these images in Adobe Bridge/Camera Raw I notice a clear difference in the jpg and raw (I understand the whole concept behind raw vs. jpg. so im not questioning why one looks different) It is obvious all the adjustments that were applied to my jpg. vs the natural raw.  My question is: When I view the same two images in the software that came with my camera, canon digital photo professionals, the canon and raw look almost identical.... My assumption is that canon is applying the same "adjustments" to my raw as it did to the jpgs?  Has anyone used these two programs and noticed this?
    Thank you in advance for your assistance.
    Michelle

    Can't say I'm an expert on DPP myself either.  I've only run it a few times myself.
    If you're seeing Photoshop freeze just by looking at the File Info tab, that's certainly not expected and you should start a tread specifically to discuss that.  The forum may be able to help you get that working.
    I happen to like the color my camera delivers in its embedded JPEGs (which I use to quickly review shots via IrfanView).  Starting with that color in Camera Raw by default just feels very natural and integrated.
    Without a specific custom profile to help you with the task, here's my suggestions for the next best thing:
    1.  Take an image with a range of different colors in it.
    2.  Open the embedded JPEG also using whatever means you have to do so.
    3.  Open it also in Camera Raw and make sure you're using the Camera Raw default parameters.
    4.  Go into the Camera Calibration tab (little camera icon), and choose the Camera Standard profile as provided by Adobe.
    5.  Tweak the various sliders so as to match the color between what you're seeing in the JPEG and Camera Raw.
    6.  Save new Camera Raw defaults.
    Some notes:
    Make sure you leave the White Balance on As Shot, since storing a specific white balance is probably not going to be helpful.
    Test your settings and repeat the above to tweak them as needed using other images.
    Keep in mind that not every application does proper color-management.  IrfanView can be set up to do so, and I don't recall whether you have to tweak a default setting to make it do that or not (it's been a while).
    Hope this helps!
    -Noel

  • Edits made in ACR don't appear in a saved file, like JPEG, TIFF, etc., and don't show in Photoshop

    Hi, I'm new to Photoshop CS5. I've used it for about a week and liked how I could use Camera Raw to do editing like noise reduction and sharpening and then save the images as JPEGs or TIFFs or open them in Photoshop for further editing. I did this a few times and it worked well. Today I edited a bunch of Raw pictures and made them look really great when viewed in ACR. When I save them in any format or open them with Photoshop they don't look like the pictures I edited at all. I use maximum quality, don't compress and so on. When viewed in anything other than Camera Raw there is a lot of noise, and the pictures are not sharp at all. Am I missing something? I spent hours trying to figure out the problem. Went through the process several times. Looked at the preference settings for Camera Raw and looked up how they are supposed to be. In fact I hadn't changed the settings and previously this seemed to have been working fine. Please, help. Sincerely, Wassili

    Aquarius1994 wrote:
    When I save them in any format or open them with Photoshop they don't look like the pictures I edited at all.
    Save the images how? How are you opening them? When you edited the images in Camera Raw, did you click Done? Or Open?
    It's kinda tough to understand the workflow of what you are doing...are you viewing the images in Bridge then opening them in Camera Raw?
    When you are editing noise and sharpening, are you viewing the images at 100% to evaluate the results?

  • LR 1.1 Speed - Looks like new database may be the answer

    I run LR on a PC - XPPro SP2, 3ghz dual core CPU, 4GB fast Ram, Matrox PCIe video card, 4 fast hard disks. Everything optimized as per Adobe and everything I can find here and elsewhere on LR related sites.
    LR 1.0 ran way too slow for me with only 11K images in my database. Great program but sluggish performance is simply not something I can put up with long term.
    Installed 1.1 last night and converted my old library. All went well but LR 1.1's speed performance was no better, maybe worse than 1.0. Somebody here, I can't find the post, suggested importing your images into a new 1.1 catalog instead of converting your old library.
    I just tried it. Imported about 1,100 images into a new catalog as a test - mixed Canon RAW, DNG, and JPEG images. I rendered standard size previews (1680) during the import.
    Wow! LR 1.1 became a totally different animal. I can now scroll through my thumbnails and standard size previews at a reasonable speed and actually enjoy looking at my pictures instead of staring at those massively annoying 3 white dots or the Loading warning. No white dots no matter how fast I scroll or page down in the grid view!! I can also scroll through my standard size previews without the Loading warning appearing as long as I go at a reasonable pace. But even if I push it, the Loading warning only appears briefly and the preview is fine, not degraded at all. Even 1:1 previews (which I did not pre-render) come up reasonably fast. This is a radical, massive improvement in speed, at least 10X better than 1.0 and 1.1 using my converted 1.0 library.
    Remember I only have 1,100 images in my test catalog so I don't know how it will handle a bigger database but if you are craving better performance, you might try creating a new catalog and test it out. I am going to import another 10K images tonight and also render 1:1 previews and see how it works.

    Ok,
    I do, and I really like the concept of LR, so i definitely want to use it, preferably with the full catalog, which is only 5000 photo's.
    Do you have all 1:1 previews generated?
    i just tried again, with standard previews generated, and 1:1 previews not generated performance is ok, faster then LR 1, with 1:1 previews generated the loading takes about one minute when i open a photo in library view (in develop it;s supposed to allways generate one, so that is normal)

  • Archiving Some RAW Files to JPEG

    I am a photography enthusiast. I shoot everything in RAW, including some recent vacation pictures. To me, pictures that have no "artistic quality" are not really worth the extra space of saving in RAW format, once I've edited the raw file. However, I like to shoot in RAW due to the many advantages of the format.
    As an example, I am never going to go back and re-edit the pictures of my Aunt's dog running along the beach. They are nice pictures, but I am not going to do anything with them aside from email them. I would like to keep a copy of the picture, along with a rating and metadata, but I don't want to keep a Raw image I will have no use for in the future. Keeping it as part of my Aperture libary is important, as I would like to stay orgainized.
    Other posts I've read often refer to how cheap storage is these days, and you should never delete a RAW. But keeping thousands of RAWs I will never use again, in a library that is backed-up in 2 or 3 places, ends up getting a little expensive.
    Ideally, I would like a project to look like this:
    3, 4, & 5 Star photos kept in RAW, 1 & 2 Stars archived as a high quality JPEG, with no Raw file kept. So that could mean that 50% of the project would be JPEG, thus saving a tremendous amount of space.
    Does anybody else do this? Any suggestions on how I could accomplish this?
    Thanks in advance for any help/feedback you can provide.
    Macbook   Mac OS X (10.4.9)  

    Okay, I started playing around with this again, and I have kind have figured out a workaround, but it is tedious. Maybe somebody can help me make it easier, such as directions on how to create an Automator for this function, etc.
    I don't usually have previews created for images automatically, so I "Update Preview" for the lower rated images, then I relocate the masters, and then I can delete the Raw master. What I am left with is an unreferenced Jpeg, with a rating of 1 or 2 stars and metadata. I can drag that over to a file on my desktop, and then re-import it. At that point, I have a high quality Jpeg master, that is a small file, with metadata, but no ratings. I then need to delete the original preview file.
    I guess I could search a project by 1 and 2 rated pics, move those to another project, relocate those masters, delete RAW files, drag and paste Jpeg previews to a folder on my desktop, and them import the new jpegs into the orignal project, rate the jpegs 1 or 2 stars, and then delete the other project with the now unreferenced jpegs.
    Anybody have ideas on making this easier.
    Macbook Mac OS X (10.4.9)

  • How can I change an image to look like a watercolor painting?

    I'm using FW CS6 and need to change an image (.bmp, .jpeg, .jpg or .fw) to look like a watercolor painting.  All help is appreciated.
    -Jack Ripley

    Maybe you had installed an action into your previous version of photoshop elements?
    Anyway here's an action that will work in pse 11, although the look is a little different.
    http://photoshop-action.no/specialfx.htm
    Also, some from panos fx
    http://www.panosfx.com/commercial-free-photoshop-actions/film-machine

Maybe you are looking for