RAW to JPEG Loss

[Andrewjmarino]

Hi

I shoot in RAW and use Lightroom for post-processing and exporting images.
Typically, I export images for limited uses such as a screensaver, a digital photo album, a website and making smaller-sized prints. I export as JPEGS.

How much of the benefits of shooting RAW (and the post-processing) do I lose when I compress and export as JPEGS?

Thank you
Andrew

[pschlute]

Hi

I shoot in RAW and use Lightroom for post-processing and exporting images.
Typically, I export images for limited uses such as a screensaver, a digital photo album, a website and making smaller-sized prints. I export as JPEGS.

How much of the benefits of shooting RAW (and the post-processing) do I lose when I compress and export as JPEGS?

Thank you
Andrew

The benefit of shooting RAW and processing into a JPEG is that you have as much as possible of the original data when you start you post-processing work. The more in-depth your PP workflow is, the more benefit you gain in your final output image (JPEG), compared to editing a JPEG produced directly by the camera.

A RAW file is not a picture file. By itself it has no benefit over say a JPEG.

[xpatUSA]

How much of the benefits of shooting RAW (and the post-processing) do I lose when I compress and export as JPEGS?

Andrew, the question is impossible to answer because it depends entirely on your post-processing and your selection of JPEG quality.

For example, in FastStone Viewer, I can select almost no compression and export a JPEG as RGB (not Y'CbCr) and lose no benefits at all. And, because raw images are usually a bit soft, I can apply some sharpening and actually gain some detail benefit in the JPEG.

Hope this helps to dispel a myth or two about JPEG quality.

[DanK]

Andrew,

Since you are using Lightroom specifically, I think this question can be answered.

I assume that when you export from Lightroom, you are selecting sRGB as the output color space dropdown menu. This is the color space used by most people when they view online. Even if they are using a color-managed browser, most people have only sRGB-compliant displays. So, I always convert to this smaller gamut when I am done editing and want to display an image online.

However, printing is another matter. Good printers have gamuts considerably larger than sRGB. If you are printing yourself from lightroom, there is no reason to export at all. Just print from the edited raw file with the proper ICC profile, and Lightroom will adjust the gamut to the combination of printer and paper. If you are sending the file out to be printed, check what the lab wants. Some will take only JPEGs in sRGB. Some will take larger gamuts.

Dan

[Andrewjmarino]

Thank you all for the answers. I had sort of assumed that the best solution is to export the highest quality possible for the desired output needed (screen/print) and not to fret too much over it.
Printing seems to be more nuanced and I will need to see if my local shop can guide me a bit more if I want some larger quality prints made.

Andrew

[xpatUSA]

Thank you all for the answers.

You're welcome.

I had sort of assumed that the best solution is to export the highest quality possible for the desired output needed (screen/print) and not to fret too much over it.

In the world of ordinary JPEGs, the highest quality possible is given at minimum compression, sometimes written as 100% quality, and with no chroma sub-sampling, sometimes written as 4:4:4 or (1x1). I don't know how lightroom says them. For posting here, I normally choose 100% quality and max sub-sampling sometimes written as 4:2:0 or (2x2).

In engineering, the "best" quality is the one most fit for the purpose.

Printing seems to be more nuanced and I will need to see if my local shop can guide me a bit more if I want some larger quality prints made.

Plenty of guidance on printing available from the cognoscenti here ... not from me though - I don't print much.