Simulating JPG from LR export

[Tim Gray]

I'm doing a session on HDR options for my local work camera club.  Message number 1 is shoot RAW - I'm still amazed at the range I can dig out of a RAW image that, according to the histograms on camera (ie  from  JPG), is hopelessly clipped.  Unfortunately I don't have any JPGs of the source images I plan to use so need to create a couple for demo purposes them from the CR2's I have.  

What LR/ACR settings would best mimic what would be happening with  "average" or "normal" in camera JPG processing settings.  The main factor that would likely impact the creation of the JPGs is the LR default of shadows of 5 - since the image has lots of dynamic range, this just exacerbates the shadow blocking - but I want to be fair so should I knock that back to 0 for the JPG conversion or leave the default as it is?  (and any other setting, although I'm not concerned for the purpose of this exercise with sharpening).  

Thanks.

[john545]

I'm doing a session on HDR options for my local work camera club.  Message number 1 is shoot RAW - I'm still amazed at the range I can dig out of a RAW image that, according to the histograms on camera (ie  from  JPG), is hopelessly clipped.  Unfortunately I don't have any JPGs of the source images I plan to use so need to create a couple for demo purposes them from the CR2's I have. 

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=166904\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Tim,

You don't say what program you are using for the HDR conversion, but I highly recommend Photomatix, which would actually circumvent the 'problem' you present with jpg conversion.

Photomatix will convert RAW files and TIF files as well. Much better to do the HDR conversion with as much data as possible, and Photmatrix does a fantastic job with HDR and exposure blends and gives plenty of controls to control the results of the image. And, I've never attempted HDR conversion with CS2, but from what I'm told, Photomatrix does a *much* better job.

What I can tell you is that I'm more than satisfied with the results I get from PM. Oh, and PM will also create a 'pseudo' HDR from one RAW file. The results, while not quite as good as from 3 differently exposed files, are still pretty good.

John545

[Tim Gray]

One of the points I will be making is that frequently you think you need a bracket, based on the LCD histogram, but, as long as you've shot raw, you can get a servicable image from one of the captures, but not if it's a JPG.  I agree that Photomatrix is superior to PS HDR.  Frankly the same is true of FTRTools, which even has a freeware version better than PS.  In fact I can get (if not better, at least easier) results in PS with simple masking or even luminosity masking if the range is complex.  

I just want to make the RAW agrument as compelling as I can.

FWIW, with the newer ACR and LR I haven't seen the need to double process a RAW image.  Between Recover and Fill Light I can get what I need without the additional processing.

[flash]

As far as I am aware, if you want to get an image from a Raw file that appears as if it were a jpeg produced in camera, the best way would be to use the camera manufacturers software and process with the default settings. For canon I know that DPP displays the file with the settings used in camera in place as a starting point. I assume Nikon does the same.

I don't think any third party software will reproduce the in camera jpeg look exactly.

Gordon

[HickersonJasonC]

I just want to make the RAW agrument as compelling as I can.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=166960\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Then I would suggest not simulating the jpeg. I agree completely with you on the benefits of RAW vs JPEG but I am always a little wary when a book/instructor tries to prove a point through simulated examples. I would rethink the images you plan to use and use instead real world examples.