[digiKam] -- extracting jpegs from RAW

[Tac Tacelosky]

I'm a bit confused about something, and hoping someone can help.

I read that saving RAW+Fine in the camera was a waste of space, because the JPEG image is stored as a preview in the RAW file itself.

But I also read that the JPEG rendering in my Fuji x100 is quite good, and is often better than "Save as JPEG" image I get when simply adding RAW images to a queue as saving them as JPEGs in another folder.

So I'm either doing something wrong, or misunderstanding something.  

I don't care much about the disk space, but it's a bit of a pain to have 2 images, displayed identically (the jpeg and the embedded jpeg preview) when using digiKam to rate my images after import, when I'm trying to decide what should happen next for each one.

And certainly I don't want to archive both the raw and jpeg if the jpeg is indeed embedded in the file.

So the question is, can I extract the camera-rendered JPEG using DigiKam, and would it be any different than storing the RAW+Fine or Raw+Normal?  Or does digiKam render it's own JPEG file from the raw, based on the camera settings (e..g while balance, constrast).

Should I be saving RAW+(Fine|Normal), or is that duplicating data I can easily get.

Thanks!

Tac

 

[Daniel Bauer-2]

Am 20.02.2018 um 18:22 schrieb Tac Tacelosky:

> So the question is, can I extract the camera-rendered JPEG using
> DigiKam, and would it be any different than storing the RAW+Fine or
> Raw+Normal?  Or does digiKam render it's own JPEG file from the raw,
> based on the camera settings (e..g while balance, constrast).
>
> Should I be saving RAW+(Fine|Normal), or is that duplicating data I can
> easily get.

I don't know if you can do it with digikam, but there are many tools
that can extract the embedded Jpeg.

But:

- if you want immediate access to a Jpeg without having to convert RAW's
or extract the Jpeg from tools, it's better to shoot RAW + JPG

- newer cameras save a full resolution JPG that is processed according
to the camera settings within the RAW. But many older cameras only embed
a lower and/or much more compressed version. So it also depends on your
camera.

Me personally always shoot RAW+highResJPG.



--
Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Barcelona
https://www.patreon.com/danielbauer
http://www.daniel-bauer.com

[Remco Viëtor]

On mardi 20 février 2018 18:22:32 CET Tac Tacelosky wrote:
> I'm a bit confused about something, and hoping someone can help.
>
> I read that saving RAW+Fine in the camera was a waste of space, because the
> JPEG image is stored as a preview in the RAW file itself.

A jpeg preview is usually stored in the Raw, but at a much smaller size, like
1/4 of the full size. Those jpegs are rendered with the same settings as for a
camera-generated full jpeg apart from the demosaicing, so they should look
identical on screen.

> But I also read that the JPEG rendering in my Fuji x100 is quite good, and
> is often better than "Save as JPEG" image I get when simply adding RAW
> images to a queue as saving them as JPEGs in another folder.
>
> So I'm either doing something wrong, or misunderstanding something.
>
> I don't care much about the disk space, but it's a bit of a pain to have 2
> images, displayed identically (the jpeg and the embedded jpeg preview) when
> using digiKam to rate my images after import, when I'm trying to decide
> what should happen next for each one.
>
> And certainly I don't want to archive both the raw and jpeg if the jpeg is
> indeed embedded in the file.

 see above.

> So the question is, can I extract the camera-rendered JPEG using DigiKam,
> and would it be any different than storing the RAW+Fine or Raw+Normal?  Or
> does digiKam render it's own JPEG file from the raw, based on the camera
> settings (e..g while balance, constrast).
As explained above, the difference between the embedded and the separate camera
jpegs is the size/resolution.
Digikam only renders a jpeg when you ask it to, using the editor. And in
practice it's very difficult to get output from a given raw file  that's
identical to the corresponding camera jpeg.

> Should I be saving RAW+(Fine|Normal), or is that duplicating data I can
> easily get.

If you mean "should I be saving Raw + fine to get the proper preview in
Digikam", the answer is "no", if you want to have a full format jpeg without
doing the editing yourself, the answer is yes (but if you don't want to edit
the raws yourself, why do you shoot Raw as well?).

Remco

[Gilles Caulier-4]

digiKam can process RAW file in batch using JPEG preview image embedded in RAW. Look in Batch Queue Manager queue settings. It's very easy to use.

Gilles Caulier 

2018-02-20 19:18 GMT+01:00 Remco Viëtor <[hidden email]>:

On mardi 20 février 2018 18:22:32 CET Tac Tacelosky wrote:
> I'm a bit confused about something, and hoping someone can help.
>
> I read that saving RAW+Fine in the camera was a waste of space, because the
> JPEG image is stored as a preview in the RAW file itself.

A jpeg preview is usually stored in the Raw, but at a much smaller size, like
1/4 of the full size. Those jpegs are rendered with the same settings as for a
camera-generated full jpeg apart from the demosaicing, so they should look
identical on screen.

> But I also read that the JPEG rendering in my Fuji x100 is quite good, and
> is often better than "Save as JPEG" image I get when simply adding RAW
> images to a queue as saving them as JPEGs in another folder.
>
> So I'm either doing something wrong, or misunderstanding something.
>
> I don't care much about the disk space, but it's a bit of a pain to have 2
> images, displayed identically (the jpeg and the embedded jpeg preview) when
> using digiKam to rate my images after import, when I'm trying to decide
> what should happen next for each one.
>
> And certainly I don't want to archive both the raw and jpeg if the jpeg is
> indeed embedded in the file.
 see above.

> So the question is, can I extract the camera-rendered JPEG using DigiKam,
> and would it be any different than storing the RAW+Fine or Raw+Normal?  Or
> does digiKam render it's own JPEG file from the raw, based on the camera
> settings (e..g while balance, constrast).
As explained above, the difference between the embedded and the separate camera
jpegs is the size/resolution.
Digikam only renders a jpeg when you ask it to, using the editor. And in
practice it's very difficult to get output from a given raw file  that's
identical to the corresponding camera jpeg.

> Should I be saving RAW+(Fine|Normal), or is that duplicating data I can
> easily get.

If you mean "should I be saving Raw + fine to get the proper preview in
Digikam", the answer is "no", if you want to have a full format jpeg without
doing the editing yourself, the answer is yes (but if you don't want to edit
the raws yourself, why do you shoot Raw as well?).

Remco