Converting Raw to JPEG

[Darrin101]

Hi Everyone. I have started shooting in RAW format, however when i convert it back to JPEG to size of file goes from 8MP in RAW to about 1.3MP in JPEG. Am i saving the files incorrectly or is this normal. Thank you for any help sent through.

[theosus]

Sounds normal to me... Mine go from 20mb to 5. Remember RAW is an uncompressed format. It's all the data the camera recorded. jpg is not really a format per se, is a compression algorithm that throws out a lot of data. It's one reason it's so popular, less space on memory cards! Saving as a jpg should be your last step when you are done processing for whatever. Jpgs don't take well to manipulation.

[Darrin101]

Thank you so much

Darrin.

[Mr Guy]

Although take care what you're saying. You said, "8MP in RAW to about 1.3MP in JPEG", which actually means, "8 mega pixels to 1.3 mega pixels". That would mean when you exported to JPEG, you changed the resolution from about 3200x2100 to 1200x1024. The question that was answered assumed that you actually MEANT to ask, "8 mega BYTES to 1.3 mega BYTES", which would mean you went, roughly, from an 8 bit RAW image to a JPEG image with 100% quality.

It turns out, in this case, that really doesn't matter a lot, but it could lead you to getting confusing answers in the future if you confuse mega pixels (the VISIBLE size of the image) with mega bytes (The amount of space on your computer the file takes up).

[Nik0nator]

Originally Posted by Mr Guy

Although take care what you're saying. You said, "8MP in RAW to about 1.3MP in JPEG", which actually means, "8 mega pixels to 1.3 mega pixels". That would mean when you exported to JPEG, you changed the resolution from about 3200x2100 to 1200x1024. The question that was answered assumed that you actually MEANT to ask, "8 mega BYTES to 1.3 mega BYTES", which would mean you went, roughly, from an 8 bit RAW image to a JPEG image with 100% quality.

It turns out, in this case, that really doesn't matter a lot, but it could lead you to getting confusing answers in the future if you confuse mega pixels (the VISIBLE size of the image) with mega bytes (The amount of space on your computer the file takes up).

Good eye I didn't catch that at all until after you mentioned it. OP like theosus said JPG should be your last step. When I'm working in files I usually go from RAW to Tiff for editing. When I'm completely finished I save the tiff file as a JPG. So this enables me to have two files that are uncompressed RAW & Tiff for any future need of the file. The JPG is a lossy format so each time it's opened it loses some of it's detail. Just try opening a picture that's 10 years old it will be very bad looking.

[Mr Guy]

Originally Posted by Nik0nator

Good eye I didn't catch that at all until after you mentioned it. OP like theosus said JPG should be your last step. When I'm working in files I usually go from RAW to Tiff for editing. When I'm completely finished I save the tiff file as a JPG. So this enables me to have two files that are uncompressed RAW & Tiff for any future need of the file. The JPG is a lossy format so each time it's opened it loses some of it's detail. Just try opening a picture that's 10 years old it will be very bad looking.

Not opened and closed, every time it's re-saved it has the potential to lose something.

[el_vago32]

My files go from 14 MB to 6 MB or so, thats 43% the size of the original file VS 16% in your case, you might be compressing a bit too much; of course that's assuming we're talking about MEGABYTES and not MEGAPIXELS here. If you're talking about megapixels then you're definitely doing something wrong.

[inkista]

Yes, it's normal. The whole point of JPEG compression is to make the file smaller. The size of the resultant file depends not only on the original RAW data, but also on the "quality" setting you chose when compressing the file. The tradeoff here, is quality for size. If you overcompress a file, you'll start to see what are known as "compression artifacts". Different people have different levels of sensitivity to seeing these things, but generally, your ideal quality-level is one where you get an appreciable size savings, but you don't see any artifacts.

[Darrin101]

Thank you for all your help.