Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: CS3 ability to open jpegs in Raw  (Read 22963 times)
wlong
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


WWW
« on: May 21, 2007, 01:18:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Forgive me if this has already been discussed here.  I'm not a regular visitor.  

I'm amazed at the discovery that CS3 allows you to open and manipulate a jpeg file in Camera Raw.  This includes Camera Raw producing a XMP file for the jpeg file.  

As I hadnt seen this in the "Whats New" section of the photoshop_cs3_help.pdf, I wondered what other goodies were tucked away?

William Long
Longshots Photography www.longshots.com.au
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9311



WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 21, 2007, 08:27:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Adobe is probably waiting to see the reaction to what I feel could be a major hurt me button here.

Once you open a JPEG in ACR, it's always going to open there. Fine if you want to edit the image, not if you simply want to view or print it. So how you setup your preferences for JPEGs and what you do with them can cause a bit of user confusion since you kind of have to commit to how you want Photoshop or ACR to handle this one file format (and hence, my discomfort with it). Its far more elegantly handled in Lightroom. You have a single user interface for all supported file formats.

Lastly, why just JPEG? And why is the product still called Adobe Camera Raw? Messy.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2882



« Reply #2 on: May 21, 2007, 08:39:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Forgive me if this has already been discussed here.  I'm not a regular visitor. 

I'm amazed at the discovery that CS3 allows you to open and manipulate a jpeg file in Camera Raw.  This includes Camera Raw producing a XMP file for the jpeg file.   

As I hadnt seen this in the "Whats New" section of the photoshop_cs3_help.pdf, I wondered what other goodies were tucked away?

William Long
Longshots Photography www.longshots.com.au
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118789\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Most of the edits that you could do with a JPG in ACR you can also do in Photoshop. One edit that would be easier in ACR would be to adjust the white balance. You only have 8 bits with which to work, but the results can be acceptable for many purposes.

Bill
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 21, 2007, 10:29:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Adobe is probably waiting to see the reaction to what I feel could be a major hurt me button here.

Once you open a JPEG in ACR, it's always going to open there. Fine if you want to edit the image, not if you simply want to view or print it. So how you setup your preferences for JPEGs and what you do with them can cause a bit of user confusion since you kind of have to commit to how you want Photoshop or ACR to handle this one file format (and hence, my discomfort with it). Its far more elegantly handled in Lightroom. You have a single user interface for all supported file formats.

Lastly, why just JPEG? And why is the product still called Adobe Camera Raw? Messy.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118824\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's no different from how LR treats RAW files, so it's just giving the same capability to those who do not use LR. Or if you want to use Bridge to open files developed with LR maybe to batch process. Makes perfect sense from that point of view.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9311



WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 21, 2007, 10:54:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's no different from how LR treats RAW files, so it's just giving the same capability to those who do not use LR. Or if you want to use Bridge to open files developed with LR maybe to batch process. Makes perfect sense from that point of view.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118849\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes its no different in functionality, big difference in user experience. ACR is a Photoshop plug-in. When you want to deal with say a Raw, it was pretty obvious you had to invoke ACR within Photoshop. Now we have a file format that might open in ACR as a plug-in or might open in Photoshop as most users expect. And its not easy to have it either way on the fly, especially if you've opened and edited the JPEG in ACR.

BTW, Bridge doesn't open anything, its a browser. You get the impression that pointing to a Raw open's it, and it does, but in ACR. You point to a JPEG, well it might open in ACR, might open in Photoshop. Again, messy.

In LR, its a single, seamless UI experience. You deal with all supported files the same way. You can if you wish, have the grid view show you the file extension and even soft that way.

One product should have been IMHO, the JPEG, Tiff, Raw software solution using metadata editing while and the other, the plug-in should have just stuck with handling raw files. Now the waters are real muddy. Again, why does ACR JUST handle JPEGs and not other rendered files? Why is it still called Adobe Camera Raw?
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2882



« Reply #5 on: May 21, 2007, 11:34:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Again, why does ACR JUST handle JPEGs and not other rendered files? Why is it still called Adobe Camera Raw?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118854\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

ACR can also open TIFFs as well as JPGs. Andrew is making a big deal about the possible confusion arising out of this new capability of ACR, but thus far only he is voicing these concerns. Time will tell. Personally, I welcome the new functionality.

Bill
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 21, 2007, 11:53:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yes its no different in functionality, big difference in user experience. ACR is a Photoshop plug-in. When you want to deal with say a Raw, it was pretty obvious you had to invoke ACR within Photoshop. Now we have a file format that might open in ACR as a plug-in or might open in Photoshop as most users expect. And its not easy to have it either way on the fly, especially if you've opened and edited the JPEG in ACR.
So what's the big deal, it's an option, set it as you would like it to behave and carry on.
And Bridge and LR work differently, wow thanks for telling me, I would never have realised.

Quote
BTW, Bridge doesn't open anything, its a browser.
Gosh! Really a browser. You're kidding right?    Actually you do open things in Bridge, not to mention ACR is actually a part of Bridge. How do you think it renders the RAW files?

Quote
In LR, its a single, seamless UI experience. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118854\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You're 'avin' a larf! Seamless LR, yeah right. I wouldn't call anything with the no. of workarounds and annoyances that LR has, seamless. I bought the wretched programme, but I'm waiting for the 1.1 release before I bother using it.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9311



WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 21, 2007, 12:28:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
ACR can also open TIFFs as well as JPGs.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118859\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It can? How?
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9311



WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 21, 2007, 12:29:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Gosh! Really a browser. You're kidding right? [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118863\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not at all. That's exactly what Bridge is. Can you open a Tiff INTO Bridge?

Quote
ACR is actually a part of Bridge. How do you think it renders the RAW files?

No, it's a Plug-in.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2882



« Reply #9 on: May 21, 2007, 01:58:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It can? How?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118869\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Very simple. Use File, Open As and click for the drop down box and select Camera Raw. On my setup *.TIFF is the first type of file listed, followed by *.CRW, *.NEF, and others. I now have a TIFF file open in Camera Raw, ready for needed adjustments. If I open in Camera Raw, the next time I open that TIFF file from Photoshop it wants to open in Camera Raw, but if I use save as in Photoshop and save the file, it then opens normally in PS without ACR. A bit weird, but I have not checked out this behavior fully.

Bill
« Last Edit: May 21, 2007, 01:59:34 PM by bjanes » Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9311



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 21, 2007, 02:18:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Very simple. Use File, Open As and click for the drop down box and select Camera Raw.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118876\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So you can, my god, a third way to do this! Even more confusing. Ops, doesn't work with PSDs! Or for that mater lots of other file formats. Goofy.

Open your Tiff in ACR, mess around with it, open it in Photoshop then close the file but don't save changes. Now open that Tiff again (just File Open) and you're back in ACR for the file. You have to point to that file, select Tiff and open it again to stay out of ACR. Now try doing the same with a JPEG (that is, try to open a Tiff but select JPEG). No go.

So now you can open Tiff's and JPEGs as Camera Raw but not other files. When you do this, you embed preference for that file (unless you're using JPEGs, the general preferences treats them all the same). So the product works differently with JPEGs than Tiffs. Smooth.

Oh, on the Tiff, have it in say ColorMatch RGB or sRGB, open in ACR but have its workflow settings set to a DIFFERENT color space. When it shows up in ACR, do nothing more than click Open Image button. I have my color settings to warn me about profile mismatch. I get this dialog and I'm told my original ColorMatch RGB file is now in ProPhoto RGB. Where was the warning I was going to convert the orignal? Well there is none but it illustrates the potential danger and complexity here. I simply 'opened' or so it seems, a Tiff in ACR, did nothing but really converted my document color space with no warning or an edit. Imagine if I didn't pay attention or have my profile mismatch warnings on and wasn't using the SAME working space in both ACR and PS.

This isn't a hugely messed up complicated way to handle documents? I think so.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2007, 02:20:24 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2882



« Reply #11 on: May 21, 2007, 02:32:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So you can, my god, a third way to do this! Even more confusing. Ops, doesn't work with PSDs! Or for that mater lots of other file formats. Goofy.

Open your Tiff in ACR, mess around with it, open it in Photoshop then close the file but don't save changes. Now open that Tiff again (just File Open) and you're back in ACR for the file. You have to point to that file, select Tiff and open it again to stay out of ACR. Now try doing the same with a JPEG (that is, try to open a Tiff but select JPEG). No go.

So now you can open Tiff's and JPEGs as Camera Raw but not other files. When you do this, you embed preference for that file (unless you're using JPEGs, the general preferences treats them all the same). So the product works differently with JPEGs than Tiffs. Smooth.

Oh, on the Tiff, have it in say ColorMatch RGB or sRGB, open in ACR but have its workflow settings set to a DIFFERENT color space. When it shows up in ACR, do nothing more than click Open Image button. I have my color settings to warn me about profile mismatch. I get this dialog and I'm told my original ColorMatch RGB file is now in ProPhoto RGB. Where was the warning I was going to convert the orignal? Well there is none but it illustrates the potential danger and complexity here. I simply 'opened' or so it seems, a Tiff in ACR, did nothing but really converted my document color space with no warning or an edit. Imagine if I didn't pay attention or have my profile mismatch warnings on and wasn't using the SAME working space in both ACR and PS.

This isn't a hugely messed up complicated way to handle documents? I think so.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118878\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I agree the whole process is convoluted and not well thought out or documented. Adobe needs to do some more work, but the ability to open a JPEG whose white balance is incorrect in ACR is an easy way to fix the problem if you don't have Lightroom. Since I shoot almost exclusively in raw, I won't be using the feature often.

Bill
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9311



WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 21, 2007, 03:43:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I agree the whole process is convoluted and not well thought out or documented. Adobe needs to do some more work, but the ability to open a JPEG whose white balance is incorrect in ACR is an easy way to fix the problem if you don't have Lightroom. Since I shoot almost exclusively in raw, I won't be using the feature often.

Bill
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118885\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Here's more fun with the potential hurt me buttons discussed.

Open a JPEG or even Tiff in ACR, make some gross tone or color alteration and click Done.

Reopen again. You see the ugly color in ACR.

Open the same file in another product, say Preview or Graphic Converter (it can't read the metadata instructions). Looks totally different.

Lightroom isn't immune to this either.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 22, 2007, 05:16:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Not at all. That's exactly what Bridge is.
Was my obvious sarcasm, a bit too subtle for you? Duh!

Quote
No, it's a Plug-in.
So what? It's how Bridge renders its images, it's an integral and essential part of Bridge, always has been.

Quote
Here's more fun with the potential hurt me buttons discussed.
Open a JPEG or even Tiff in ACR, make some gross tone or color alteration and click Done.
Reopen again. You see the ugly color in ACR.
Open the same file in another product, say Preview or Graphic Converter (it can't read the metadata instructions). Looks totally different.
Lightroom isn't immune to this either.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118870\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well duh! Judging this post and the others, you simply do not grok the paradigm used by LR/ACR/Bridge. And then you have the audacity to moan about the tool working oddly.
Do you also whinge about how you cannot see the hidden layers in PSD files when looking at them in say Word or Safari? Oh, I forgot you cannot even view them at all in those programmes. So PSDs and Photoshop must be bad too, for making files that not every programme can read completely.

As you missed the point above, treating Jpegs in ACR is an option. If it bothers you, do not tick box to open in RAW. Problem solved. That's what I do.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9311



WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 22, 2007, 07:57:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So what? It's how Bridge renders its images, it's an integral and essential part of Bridge, always has been.

No, Bridge doesn't render the image, ACR, a plug-in does. Bridge just points to the file and calls up a totally different 'application'.

Quote
Well duh! Judging this post and the others, you simply do not grok the paradigm used by LR/ACR/Bridge.

Oh, I get it. If only I could share with you, conversations I and others (guys like Bruce Fraser)made as alpha testers to Adobe about this, when you didn't have a clue CS3 even existed! I'm talking November of 05 buddy.

Quote
And then you have the audacity to moan about the tool working oddly.

Yup, and I'm not alone.

Quote
Do you also whinge about how you cannot see the hidden layers in PSD files when looking at them in say Word or Safari?

Is whinge a word?

No, I'm not talking about Word or Safari. And I didn't say anything about hidden layers. Open a JPEG in any application other than ACR or LR after making adjustments there and tell me what the preview looks like. They don't match, not even close.

Quote
As you missed the point above, treating Jpegs in ACR is an option

No really? Thanks for pointing that out to me. You're a weight of information and a pleasure to communicate with (Was my obvious sarcasm, a bit too subtle for you?)

The point isn't there's an option or that we shouldn’t be able to handle JPEGs like raws with metadata edits. The point is, the current implementation is super sloppy.

We haven't even discussed what a poor engine ACR is for handling this kind of work considering it's doing all processing in a linear gamma very wide gamut space and has to convert all gamma corrected JPEGs and Tiffs to this tone response curve then back to simply apply the edits. A good deal of JPEGs are going to fall apart in a bad way using this process. ACR's engine was designed for linear encoded high bit raw data. If you don't know the vast differences between that and a rendered gamma corrected JPEG, we need to start a new thread and start the education process.

JPEG and rendered metadata editing is useful. Doing it in ACR, even if you fixed this kludge of a workflow and user options is still a very bad idea. Its as Bruce said, a clever hack.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2007, 07:59:37 AM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
PeterLange
Guest
« Reply #15 on: May 22, 2007, 11:44:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
... The point is, the current implementation is super sloppy.

We haven't even discussed what a poor engine ACR is for handling this kind of work considering it's doing all processing in a linear gamma very wide gamut space and has to convert all gamma corrected JPEGs and Tiffs to this tone response curve then back to simply apply the edits. A good deal of JPEGs are going to fall apart in a bad way using this process. ACR's engine was designed for linear encoded high bit raw data. ...
I don’t have any particular shares here,
but this sounds like a lack of 16 bit support
for both gamut conversions and the work in-between in said linear-gamma ProPhoto space (?).

Best regards, Peter

--
« Last Edit: May 22, 2007, 11:52:35 AM by PeterLange » Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9311



WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 22, 2007, 12:14:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don’t have any particular shares here,
but this sounds like a lack of 16 bit support
for both gamut conversions and the work in-between in said linear-gamma ProPhoto space (?).

--
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119012\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Having a 16-bit pathway would help. But you've already toss away a huge amount of usable data going to an output referred tone corrected rendering just to go back into a linear space just to apply edits. IOW, ideally, a rendered image in gamma corrected space would be handled one way, raw linear another (and in such a way that the user doesn't have to tell the app which is which and neither pipeline affects or hurts the other). It would be nice if one could do the editing, as we have NOW in the working space of the original document too. Going from sRGB to linear encoded ProPhoto back to sRGB (assuming the user wants that out the back end) on 8-bit JPEG isn't ideal and not how editing in Photoshop handles the identical data.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2882



« Reply #17 on: May 22, 2007, 01:49:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Oh, I get it. If only I could share with you, conversations I and others (guys like Bruce Fraser)made as alpha testers to Adobe about this, when you didn't have a clue CS3 even existed! I'm talking November of 05 buddy.
Yup, and I'm not alone.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118978\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Some of those conversations would be interesting. Unfortunately, Bruce is no longer with us, but from the Lightroom Podcast No 8, one could sense some disagreements, which were glossed over. Any further comments you can share with us Andrew?

Quote
The point isn't there's an option or that we shouldn’t be able to handle JPEGs like raws with metadata edits. The point is, the current implementation is super sloppy.

We haven't even discussed what a poor engine ACR is for handling this kind of work considering it's doing all processing in a linear gamma very wide gamut space and has to convert all gamma corrected JPEGs and Tiffs to this tone response curve then back to simply apply the edits. A good deal of JPEGs are going to fall apart in a bad way using this process. ACR's engine was designed for linear encoded high bit raw data. If you don't know the vast differences between that and a rendered gamma corrected JPEG, we need to start a new thread and start the education process.

JPEG and rendered metadata editing is useful. Doing it in ACR, even if you fixed this kludge of a workflow and user options is still a very bad idea. Its as Bruce said, a clever hack.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118978\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, but isn't the internal working space of Lightroom also linear with ProPhoto chromaticities, and don't some of these limitations also apply to Lightroom?
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9311



WWW
« Reply #18 on: May 22, 2007, 01:56:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Some of those conversations would be interesting. Unfortunately, Bruce is no longer with us, but from the Lightroom Podcast No 8, one could sense some disagreements, which were glossed over. Any further comments you can share with us Andrew?

Lets just say he saw the writing on the wall.

Quote
Yes, but isn't the internal working space of Lightroom also linear with ProPhoto chromaticities, and don't some of these limitations also apply to Lightroom?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119039\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yup they do. The only main difference is the way in which its all presented to the user.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
PeterLange
Guest
« Reply #19 on: May 22, 2007, 04:46:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Having a 16-bit pathway would help. ... IOW, ideally, a rendered image in gamma corrected space would be handled one way, raw linear another (and in such a way that the user doesn't have to tell the app which is which and neither pipeline affects or hurts the other). ... Going from sRGB to linear encoded ProPhoto back to sRGB (assuming the user wants that out the back end) on 8-bit JPEG isn't ideal and not how editing in Photoshop handles the identical data.
Many thanks for sharing these insights.
Much appreciated.

Best regards, Peter

--
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad