Canon 的機器,拍 RAW,回到家用 Canon 的軟體輸出 JPEG,照理說應該看不出差異的,因為機身和軟體轉換的演算法應該相同。但若回到家用其他家軟體輸出 JPEG,恐怕不只畫質,連顏色、對比都會有差異。
基本上相機拍完照後,內部都是 RAW,只是被晶片處理成 JPEG 儲存罷了。所以兩種方法只不過是先被相機處理成 JPEG,或後來用電腦處理成 JPEG 的分別而已。處理是否較好較壞就要看電腦用的軟體是什麼,差異可能相當大,也可能差不多。所以選擇處理 RAW 檔的軟體相當重要,發色、銳利度都要看軟體。
小弟猜想,相機晶片的好壞也許分別就在此,運算能力不足的晶片,只能用較簡單、處理快速的演算法。以維持相機連拍等等操作的順暢度,但成像結果也許就較差。或是犧牲相機操作順暢度,來讓晶片有更多時間,用較好的作法處理圖片。在軟體上也相同,處理快速的軟體,可能就是犧牲了輸出畫質。然而電腦上比較不在乎輸出時間,或許就會選用處理時間雖然長,但效果較好的演算法。
這是 Olympus E-P1 的 RAW 檔測試
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep1/page16.asp
他就測試了四個 RAW 檔處理軟體,比對 JPEG 直出的結果。
片段的資訊,不如讀完整一點的說明,知道何謂RAW format,然後自己判斷
RAW image format (on Wiki)
擷取部分
優點
* Higher image quality. Because all the calculations (such as applying the gamma curve, demosaicing, white balance, brightness, contrast, etc...) used to generate pixel values (in RGB format for most images) are performed in one step on the base data, the resultant pixel values will be more accurate and exhibit less posterization.
* Bypassing of undesired steps in the camera's processing, including sharpening and noise reduction
* JPEG images are typically saved using a lossy compression format (though a lossless JPEG compression is now available). Raw formats are typically either uncompressed or use lossless compression, so the maximum amount of image detail is always kept within the raw file.
* Finer control. Raw conversion software allows users to manipulate more parameters (such as lightness, white balance, hue, saturation, etc...) and do so with greater variability. For example, the white point can be set to any value, not just discrete preset values like "daylight" or "incandescent".
* Camera raw files have 12 or 14 bits of intensity information, not the gamma-compressed 8 bits stored in JPEG files (and typically stored in processed TIFF files); since the data is not yet rendered and clipped to a color space gamut, more precision may be available in highlights, shadows, and saturated colors.
* The color space can be set to whatever is desired.
* Different demosaicing algorithms can be used, not just the one coded into the camera.
* The contents of raw files include more information, and potentially higher quality, than the converted results, in which the rendering parameters are fixed, the color gamut is clipped, and there may be quantization and compression artifacts.
* Large transformations of the data, such as increasing the exposure of a dramatically under-exposed photo, result in less visible artifacts when done from raw data than when done from already rendered image files. Raw data leave more scope for both corrections and artistic manipulations, without resulting in images with visible flaws such as posterization.
缺點
* Camera raw files are typically 2–6 times larger than JPEG files. While use of raw formats avoids the compression artifacts inherent in JPEG, fewer images can fit on a given memory card. However, software like Rawzor can do lossless compression of camera raw images, reducing the disk space needed to store them without losing any quality or meta-information.
* It takes longer for the camera to write raw image files to the card, since they are larger, so fewer pictures can be taken in quick succession (affecting the ability to shoot, for example, a sports sequence).
* Most raw formats do not use compression or implement light lossless data compression to reduce the size of the files without affecting image quality. But some others use lossy data compression where quantization and filtering is performed on the image data. Many recent cameras let photographers choose between no compression, lossless compression or lossy compression for their raw images.
* There is still no widely accepted standard raw format. Three potential candidates for a standard format have been put forward, but none has been adopted by many major camera companies. Numerous different raw formats are currently in use and new raw formats keep appearing, while others are abandoned.
* Because of the lack of a standard raw format, more specialized software may be required to open raw files than for standardized formats like JPEG or TIFF. Software developers have to frequently update their products to support the raw formats of the latest cameras but open source implementations like dcraw make it easy.
* The time taken in the image workflow is an important factor when choosing between raw and ready-to-use image formats. With modern photo editing software the additional time needed to process raw images has been greatly reduced but it still requires an extra step in workflow.
其實照優缺點對你的重要性來自行決定就好
要精準控制的,照RAW (以底片時代比喻,就是自己沖底片)
不想 或 沒把握,或是 不需要 自行掌握 digital developing 的情境下,就給相機內建程式去自動套用出圖(以底片時代來比喻,就是送店家跑機器的自動設定洗。但是你沒有底片,只有店家洗好的照片-->相機處理好的JPG。還好單純複製至少不失真)
自己從RAW檔develop 影像,你當然也可以套自動程式,你也可以自己手工放像。
RAW-->JPG可以到什麼程度,有你的能力跟程式的能力這些變數在裡面跑。要搞得比相機內建的自動程式爛,也不是不可能,但無法用這點來推翻RAW事實上保留更多資料,因此給予更大潛力這件事實。
我想拍RAW的朋友,很大的原因是想要保留那份「彈性」。可以修,也可以不修。現在只求還原現場不需要修,但不知道以後是否可能拿來做別得用途,可能會需要修成特定樣子。此時就會感謝有RAW檔讓你發揮。
如果沒有這些考量,那用JPG或許可以應付大部分情況。端看你打算多嚴謹,整個 「攝影到顯影」的流程打算介入到什麼程度,有沒有後續的考量需要保留最大彈性?
Who needs a lifestyle-statement SUV?
Eason-911 wrote:
有人說會有很小的差...(恕刪)
同一張 RAW,同樣的設定,
用相機原廠的工具、PS、LightRoom 或 Aperture 出 JPEG,
效果都會不一樣了,何況是相機?
轉 30 分鐘已經算很快了,
真的要講究的話,每張相片光是後製的時間都不只 30 分鐘,
一張有特殊用途的相片花上一整天慢慢微調都不奇怪。
只能說青菜蘿蔔各有所好,
喜歡用 RAW 的自然會去用 RAW,
不懂為何要用 RAW 的自然會去用 JPEG,
各取所需,也沒什麼不好。
還有,不曉得是不是心裡作用還是後製工具比較進步,
以前我用 40D 的 RAW 轉或用 JPEG 直出的差異不大,
後來我用 5D2 的 RAW 轉,和 JPEG 直出的差異真的非常大,
尤其是在低光源高 ISO 的場合。
C 家的噪訊抑制已經不錯了,但經過工具進一步處理,效果真的差很多。
愛用RAW的就用RAW
就說這是習慣問題
用了RAW覺得麻煩的人 就會回去拍JPG
拍了RAW覺得好的人 就會保留RAW
沒甚麼好不好
只是要是說 拍RAW的技術不好 這就不能苟同
失焦 過曝的照片 就算拍RAW也救不回來
RAW跟甚麼技術根本沒關係
難道大師就一定要JPG直出? 拍RAW的就是新手?
RAW只是個工具 覺得好不好 需不需要使用看個人
但RAW也是單眼上跟一般傻瓜相機不同的地方
為什麼不能好好利用呢?
除了銳利度之外 還有更多的彈性
這也是為什麼HDR 用RAW拍三張 會比JPG拍三張 合成 暗部細節來的多
Canon 5D3, Honda civic8, http://blog.xuite.net/luckyjacky/wretch




























































































