Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] E-M5 embedded JPEG

Subject: Re: [OM] E-M5 embedded JPEG
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 23:13:52 -0800
On 2/11/2013 8:04 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Yes, the E-M5 does have an embedded JPEG in the raw file and the image
> is medium sized at 3200x2400.  ...
>
> So FastStone to the rescue.  FastStone isn't particularly fast but
> clearly also uses the embedded JPEGs for slideshows.  It doesn't have a
> specifically identified function for extracting the JPEGs but will do
> the job with its export for email (which you can direct to a a file).
> It was FastStone which identified the JPEG file size by defaulting to an
> image size of 3400x2400.

Its easy enough to see the size of the embedded JPEGs in Raw files in 
FastStone. Just go full screen on a Raw image and 
the size is shown at the top.

> FastStone can also convert the raw file but is fairly slow and seems to give 
> some different colors.

There's been some talk about FS functions here. It's pretty obvious that the 
developer is embedding various free and 
open source processes, not developing them himself.

The result is inconsistent quality, as someone recently pointed out about its 
NR function. IMO, anyone using FS for 
image editing is limiting the amount they can do and the quality of what they 
do.

Not to say it doesn't have some excellent functions, but test 'em first, before 
relying on them for something important. 
The downsampling batch actions give a lot of flexibility and work quite well, 
for example.

Raw development is almost certainly using DCRaw, which will by default have a 
different rendition than Oly or Adobe 
software.

> Adobe Bridge clearly uses the embedded JPEGs for slideshows also but
> seems to forget what they might useful for if you ask it to export
> images sized at 3200x2400 with a raw file as input. It does so slowly
> because it needlessly uses Camera Raw to convert the raw file before
> writing the JPEG.
>
> Silly software.

I don't believe Adobe would agree. Part of what they charge all the big bucks 
for is standard results. With each new 
camera they support for Raw files in ACR, they photograph a color reference and 
make a default conversion profile that 
looks a whole lot like their default conversions for other cameras, as much as 
they can, in fact.

In the case of the 5D and 60D, I prefer their defaults to Canon's.DPP converter 
defaults.

They want any output from Bridge to match what ACR/LR  defaults would produce, 
not some other look. They are all about 
integration and consistency.

As you have found, FS is happy to pull out the embedded JPEGs, no matter what 
camera settings may have produced them. 
And there are other ways, including some stand alone apps, to do that.

Standardized Moose

-- 
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz