# Matching the RAW to the JPG to set a preset - help



## Leftyplayer (Feb 7, 2012)

I've been shooting RAW.  However, with a recent project, the way the RAW file "differs" from the jpg preview is frustrating because the infinitessimal shift in color makes all the difference with the images.  It's super subtle, but it matters.  So, on the next shoot, I shifted to shooting RAW+JPG, so that I could have the jpg digital negative.  Now I want to basically edit the RAW until it looks like the jpg and set that as some sort of preset to be applied to the previous photos I took (and any future imports of photos in this project).

1. Can I possibly edit the RAW file in the Develop mode while having the JPG right by it's side for comparison or do I need to just edit the RAW and keep going back to the library to compare after the change?

2. Once I have created the edits to my liking, am I able to add those changes as a "Profile" under "Camera Calibration" and apply them to multiple RAW images (as well as on Import next time)?  If that's not where I save those changes, are they just a regular old Preset that I would apply?

Thanks for any help you can offer.  And I'm still just figuring this out, so if you have a totally different solution, it would be highly appreciated.  I've enjoyed shooting RAW but in this case, I have found the tiny shift in colors frustrating, as it has ruined some of the photos (well, not really, I can fix it of course).  I did try "Camera Standard" as well as "Adobe Standard" and all the other profiles and none give me the exact same coloring as the JPG preview that originally shows up (and was what I was aiming for to begin with).  Thank you.


----------



## MReid (Feb 7, 2012)

.....use the jpeg....really, why do all that work to the raw to end up where you started with the jpeg....scratches head.


----------



## analog.universe (Feb 7, 2012)

Try using Canon Digital Photo Professional, instead of Adobe Camera RAW.  The Canon software is designed to decode the same way the in-camera algorithm does...   Also, ACR is one of my least favorite RAW converters in terms getting an image exactly where I want it.  I like it when I don't know how I want to process the image, but it's too "user-friendly" or something if you're really trying to get accuracy.


----------



## Leftyplayer (Feb 7, 2012)

> .....use the jpeg....really, why do all that work to the raw to end up where you started with the jpeg....scratches head.



I am using the jpg with the new set of photos that I took.  For the previous couple of shoots, though, I had only shot in RAW, so I don't have a jpg for those - hence my attempt to match a RAW+JPG in the last set and then apply the changes to all the previous RAW files (and future ones in this set).  Sort of set up consistent color correction I can apply to all.



> Try using Canon Digital Photo Professional, instead of Adobe Camera RAW.



I've been using Lightroom 3 and have all the photos imported in there.  Honestly, I've never used Canon Digital Photo Professional ... would I be able to open it and have it somehow get the RAW photos from Lightroom?  I'll go tinker, but any guidance would be helpful.


----------



## MReid (Feb 7, 2012)

Get the Scott Kelby Lightroom instruction book, he explains how to do all the things you are asking about in there.

In the future maybe just stick with jpegs....the only difference, since you are editing in Lightroom, is the margin of error on saving blown out areas.
Get your in camera setting how you like them with your jpegs and you will probably increase your fun factor and decrease your frustration.


----------



## MLeeK (Feb 7, 2012)

If you want the exact look of the jpeg that the camera produces then why work in raw? That's just silly. 

Take a look at the camera settings for your jpegs and you can get a good idea of what you will need in raw by the picture style settings for color, sharpness, saturation, contrast, etc.


----------



## Leftyplayer (Feb 7, 2012)

> Get the Scott Kelby Lightroom instruction book, he explains how to do all the things you are asking about in there.



Good thing it's sitting on my bookshelf right now :er:.  Have had it on 'to do' list to go through it to expand my knowledge - looks like that time has come.  Maybe I'll skip straight to that part for now.



> In the future maybe just stick with jpegs....the only difference, since  you are editing in Lightroom, is the margin of error on saving blown out  areas.
> Get your in camera setting how you like them with your jpegs and you  will probably increase your fun factor and decrease your frustration.


Yes, I'm definitely going to do at least RAW+JPG for now.  Except for some very specific situations, I take a lot of time to get my settings a certain way right in the camera (or re-take the shot if it gets blown out based on the histogram/blinkies) - but all that care becomes pointless when shooting RAW.  While I appreciate the benefits of RAW, it's also a lot of work if you got the exact shot you wanted in-camera. With this particular shoot, I now have to edit photos that would've been perfectly fine right out of the camera 

Having said that, I just opened Digital Photo Professional and the photos look as shot.  Is it just a mirage?  Meaning, is it showing me a jpg preview that's not "really there"?  Or is there a way to save those photos as I'm seeing them and re-import them into Lightroom as JPG?


----------



## Leftyplayer (Feb 7, 2012)

> If you want the exact look of the jpeg that the camera produces then why work in raw? That's just silly.



I know .  With all the exaltation of shooting RAW, I failed to understand the downside of shooting in only RAW - learned the hard way.  Good thing all is not lost.  And I have had shots saved by RAW in the past, so not knocking it.  RAW+JPG probably the best way to go in most unpredictable instances.  But I'm doing super macro stuff of non-moving object and have all the time in the world to get the shots right - in this case, the RAW was the wrong way to go.  Live and learn.


----------



## MLeeK (Feb 7, 2012)

Sure you can save them just as they are. DPP has applied it's default adjustments to the images and now you can either save them as a jpeg just like they are.


----------



## MReid (Feb 7, 2012)

If you think of Raw and Jpeg as tools that may help you. Use whichever suits the job.
I shoot in Jpeg whenever I can....only time I don't is paid jobs where there will be bright colors with the random chance of them being blown out.....mostly just for weddings.


----------



## Leftyplayer (Feb 7, 2012)

I will heed your advice, MReid.  And, thanks MLeek - good to know I can do it that way.


----------



## KmH (Feb 7, 2012)

Raw is like a film negative. It has to be developed, edited both locally and globally, and otherwise prepared for printing. That editing and prep for print can be done in many different ways usimg that one negative.

JPEG is a globally edited by the camera, ready-to-print file, right out of the camera. The negative no longer exists if you shot JPEG only. Any technical issues with the exposure are pretty much permanent.


----------



## patrickt (Feb 8, 2012)

There is no magic formula. The settings depend on where you start, the specific photo, and where you want to go. I noticed as I processed prints that almost all my raw shots got a bit of contrast, a little vibrance, and a shot of clarity.  The other parameters varied widely but those three were fairly consistant so I put them in as preferences. Everything else varies, usually, from one shot to the next. If I do a series and need to adjust WB, for example, I might to that to all the shots at once but for me that's fairly rare.


----------



## KmH (Feb 8, 2012)

FWIW.

Unlike JPEG and TIFF, which are an acronyms for _*J*_oint *P*hotography _*E*_xperts _*G*_roup, and _*T*_agged *I*mage *F*ile _*F*_ormat, Raw is not an acronym for anything, which is why only the R gets capitalized.


----------

