Lightroom 7's new Embedded & Sidecar workflow

[jrsforums]

When you shoot raw+JPEG, which gets the optimal exposure?

Andrew, it’s always a conundrum, isn’t it. 

I have decided, that for me raw+jpeg is not worth it.  I go straight to 1:1 previews.  Before latest, it meant going for a cup of coffee.  Now, with classic and speedy system/gpu the wait is short, but worth it when reviewing later.

[digitaldog]

Andrew, it’s always a conundrum, isn’t it.

Only for those that continue to recommend shooting raw+JPEG, like John, but without informing the reader to the severe downside in doing so for (usually) the raw data. Not that optimal exposure isn't photography 101 and not that the concept of exposing optimally for raw wasn't originally found on this site by the founder who invented the ETTR 'term' (which by now needs to go) but more importantly, the correct idea that exposure for raw isn't the same as exposure for a JPEG. Those that care about image data quality often want optimal exposure for the media they are aiming for.

[rdonson]

Andrew, John was sharing the advantage of shooting RAW+JPG for Fuji X-Trans photographers.  It provides good previews quickly from which to choose RAW files that you want to process further.  I'm a Fuji X-Trans photographer and once I see a file that is of interest to me I process the RAW to DNG using Iridient Developer or Iridient X-Transformer.  For my tastes Iridient provides superior demosaicing and sharpening to what Lightroom offers.  The JPGs are typically deleted. 

[digitaldog]

Andrew, John was sharing the advantage of shooting RAW+JPG for Fuji X-Trans photographers. 

The photographers I know (and trained with) understand the role of optimal exposure for the media they are capturing.
How does one accomplish this shooting raw+JPEG? 

The JPGs are typically deleted.

So the capture exposure is optimized for the raw? And the JPEGs look like crap and get deleted.
My comment is about which of the two is optimally exposed for at least those that understand you can't optimize both at the same time; something John and his audience may or may not be aware of.

[rdonson]

Andrew, shooting RAW+JPG enables Lr Classic to create high res previews MUCH faster.  It's NOT about exposure.  It's NOT about JPGs looking good or accurate.  It's about having large previews that you can get to quickly.  An example is when I photograph a day of horse racing and come away with thousands of photos to cull through this is a very real boon for me and I suspect others as well.  Waiting for Lr to take an hour to create previews is painful. 

Yes, I know how to expose properly and get good color. 

[digitaldog]

Andrew, shooting RAW+JPG enables Lr Classic to create high res previews MUCH faster.  It's NOT about exposure. 

WHICH is exposed correctly? Which isn't? Simple questions with only one answer.

[john beardsworth]

How can the Raw and the JPEG have different exposures? Do any cameras allow you to do that?

[digitaldog]

How can the Raw and the JPEG have different exposures? Do any cameras allow you to do that?

Do you suppose he’s asking the person on his ignore list to explain how a raw plus JPEG capture can’t be optimally exposed for both?

[jrsforums]

How can the Raw and the JPEG have different exposures? Do any cameras allow you to do that?

They don’t   

What Andrew is talking about is you can optimize each of them differently.  The best exposure for a jpeg will, most often, not be the exposure that allows you the best dynamic range after processing the raw file...such as ETTR.  The jpeg exposed this way will be useless in reviewing the image. 

White balance could be another difference.  Also, in camera sharpness and contrast settings.

[john beardsworth]

They don’t.

Thanks.

[fdisilvestro]

Do any cameras allow you to do that?

Unfortunately not

[jrsforums]

Thanks.

But you knew that....

[digitaldog]

But you knew that....

Whenever I hear anyone recommend a raw+JPEG capture, I have to ask them if they fully realize what they are giving up in terms of image data in the raw due to under exposure.
So some know, some don't but they keep recommending the workflow without the warnings.

[rdonson]

I'd be happy to shoot RAW only for everything IF Adobe could create high res previews in a more expeditious manner.   Do I shoot RAW+JPG for everything?  No.  It is a real boon though for sports.  I've never encountered a person who told me that my sports photos didn't have perfect color or exposure after processing.

[ButchM]

Whenever I hear anyone recommend a raw+JPEG capture, I have to ask them if they fully realize what they are giving up in terms of image data in the raw due to under exposure.
So some know, some don't but they keep recommending the workflow without the warnings.

Andrew .. the whole point of this thread and the new feature brought to Lightroom Classic is not to optimize a RAW+jpeg workflow ... it is merely a method to allow much quicker culling utilizing the embedded jpeg files for RAW image files .... and a workaround for Fuji cameras in order to use of the feature is to shoot RAW+jpeg for now to take advantage.

For the purpose of this specific feature ... the accompanying jpeg files from the Fuji cameras and their potentially incorrect exposure is inconsequential beyond the initial viewing/culling process.

I, and others have been asking for this capability for over a decade. After shooting sports, news, events and timely features for over 45 years,  that must meed strict deadlines, the time it takes to render/build previews can be costly. I can evaluate an image based upon the embedded or sidecar jpeg just fine regardless if the jpeg preview has received 'optimum' exposure consideration. It isn't a real world issue in the sense that for this instance the accompanying jpeg for Fuji cameras is important at all once these initial steps are completed.

[digitaldog]

Andrew .. the whole point of this thread and the new feature brought to Lightroom Classic is not to optimize a RAW+jpeg workflow ... it is merely a method to allow much quicker culling utilizing the embedded jpeg files for RAW image files .... and a workaround for Fuji cameras in order to use of the feature is to shoot RAW+jpeg for now to take advantage.

Not only am I aware of that, it doesn't change the facts about raw+JPEG and exposure! One has to suffer. At least with my system, the JPEG would be a good 1.5 stops over exposed for optimal raw exposure and I think many here understand the effect on that JPEG in doing so; preview only or not.

Whenever I hear anyone recommend a raw+JPEG capture, I have to ask them if they fully realize what they are giving up in terms of image data in the raw due to under exposure.
So some know, some don't but they keep recommending the workflow without the warnings.

[john beardsworth]

Andrew .. the whole point of this thread and the new feature brought to Lightroom Classic is not to optimize a RAW+jpeg workflow ...

For the purpose of this specific feature ... the accompanying jpeg files from the Fuji cameras and their potentially incorrect exposure is inconsequential beyond the initial viewing/culling process.

Yes, though the workaround is not just for Fuji but for Olympus and any other cameras that may embed a low res JPEG.

I do feel mirrorless cameras encourage one to expose to make the photo look right in the viewfinder, rather than the optimal exposure for raw processing. Of course, even if this is more than a theory, it has nothing to do with whether you shoot raw only, raw+jpeg, or use the embedded & sidecar option.

Monty Python, anyone?

[rdonson]

Monty Python, anyone?

Perfect!

[Mark D Segal]

Not only am I aware of that, it doesn't change the facts about raw+JPEG and exposure! One has to suffer. At least with my system, the JPEG would be a good 1.5 stops over exposed for optimal raw exposure and I think many here understand the effect on that JPEG in doing so; preview only or not.

Whenever I hear anyone recommend a raw+JPEG capture, I have to ask them if they fully realize what they are giving up in terms of image data in the raw due to under exposure.
So some know, some don't but they keep recommending the workflow without the warnings.

Andrew, I think what they're trying to share with you/all the readers, is a view that it doesn't matter. They are using the JPG as a convenience for quick file viewing, so whether it's exposed properly is kind of immaterial - they use the raw file for that, and it's easy to focus on the raw because most cameras nowadays give you the live histogram where you can see in real time whether/what you are clipping in the raw file. I think it's a pointless discussion. Two different formats serving different purposes.

And John, if any one wants to fool themselves relying on a JPG or an EVF view of scene exposure when it's the raw file they intend to process, they need to go back to photography school and learn what the histogram is there for, where the histogram data comes from and how to learn whether their histogram information has a tendency of over-stating or under-stating exposure and DR relative to what comes out in the raw file as interpreted in one's raw converter. One develops a feel for it pretty quickly if one is aware there could be an issue in the first place.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Perfect!

+1.