FZ1000: Standard vs Neutral using RAW?

[flycaster]

So, the question is: When shooting RAW, does it make any difference in outcome when camera is set to Standard or Neutral? One difference I think I observe is that the image colors I see through the EFV appear to look more real-life when in Neutral.

 

[Jerry045]

So, the question is: When shooting RAW, does it make any difference in outcome when camera is set to Standard or Neutral? One difference I think I observe is that the image colors I see through the EFV appear to look more real-life when in Neutral.

It is my belief that the various scene modes do not affect the RAW data. They are only used on the JPG output. The RAW file should be whatever was on the sensor and it should be up to you to process it to your taste. Now most RAW files contain a small JPG file in them for viewing, but you should not confuse that with what you see when using a true RAW processing program.

 

[flycaster]

It is my belief that the various scene modes do not affect the RAW data. They are only used on the JPG output. The RAW file should be whatever was on the sensor and it should be up to you to process it to your taste. Now most RAW files contain a small JPG file in them for viewing, but you should not confuse that with what you see when using a true RAW processing program.

Actually, I didn't think this would make a difference in the RAW output from the camera. BTW, I do use RAW processing software. But, now let me ask: What about the image in the EVF? Is it RAW or JPG? If it is JPG, it might be effected by the Quality setting?

 

[Jerry045]

Actually, I didn't think this would make a difference in the RAW output from the camera. BTW, I do use RAW processing software. But, now let me ask: What about the image in the EVF? Is it RAW or JPG? If it is JPG, it might be effected by the Quality setting?

I believe it is a JPG that is affected by the setting, so as to give you an idea what the output JPG is going to look like. The RAW file is usually preprocessing, so it would not show any effects.

 

[AlbertM43user]

In case of Panasonic cameras, might be the same for other brands, RAW is a pile of original sensor data which without proper conversion couldn't be be playback on any media. The most common solution is to create a JPG (could be in various size from tiny, small to medium depends on the brand/model) simultaneously and it was embedded to the RAW file. If you shoot RAW, you are actually looking at the embedded JPG in evf/LCD.

Therefore if you shoot RAW only and playback the image in camera under higher magnification, the image would fall apart quickly. Generally if you wish to have a close look to the playback image, you would be better off to shoot RAW+fine JPG. The fine JPG (will be used instead of the embedded JPG to the RAW) could behave better on higher magnification.

The live view indeed simulate an image based on the JPG. Therefore for RAW shooting, what you see in LV could expect to have higher headroom (on highlight and shadow) if you would convert it properly later. So are the zebra and histogram.

 

[flycaster]

In case of Panasonic cameras, might be the same for other brands, RAW is a pile of original sensor data which without proper conversion couldn't be be playback on any media. The most common solution is to create a JPG (could be in various size from tiny, small to medium depends on the brand/model) simultaneously and it was embedded to the RAW file. If you shoot RAW, you are actually looking at the embedded JPG in evf/LCD.

Therefore if you shoot RAW only and playback the image in camera under higher magnification, the image would fall apart quickly. Generally if you wish to have a close look to the playback image, you would be better off to shoot RAW+fine JPG. The fine JPG (will be used instead of the embedded JPG to the RAW) could behave better on higher magnification.

The live view indeed simulate an image based on the JPG. Therefore for RAW shooting, what you see in LV could expect to have higher headroom (on highlight and shadow) if you would convert it properly later. So are the zebra and histogram.

What I get from your response is that the EVF for my FZ1000 will show a jpg when shooting RAW. But, if I shoot RAW+fine jpg, then the image in the EVF will be a "better" jpg. And, if this is the case, then regardless of which jpg is shown, that jpg will represent the quality setting (Standard, Neutral, etc.). However, will this really make any difference as the quality setting will not change the data within the RAW image? If this so, then I'd like to know how playing back the RAW+jpg jpg image in camera will help me decide about keeping the image...perhaps, other than sharpness?

 

[AlbertM43user]

If you would use RAW, by a compartible RAW Converter it can read the JPG setting used and if you do the conversion on automatic (default), the RAW Converter will apply the same set of setting to produce a JPG. The converted output could be similar to the SOOC JPG, with certain improved result since the Converter might take the most adventages of higher headroom of RAW plus the more powerful Converter as a software alone vs the JPG engine in camera.

You might try to shoot in monochrome mode. In evf, LV will be a b+w image. On playback, you can see a b+w output too on RAW or RAW+ JPG. But when you view them on computer, the JPG will be in b+w, the RAW will be in full color.

The following are 2 screenshots on my computer for a RAW+JPG shooting in monochrome style from GX7:

On FastStone, both are in b+w because FastStone will use the embedded JPG of the RAW file:

On DXO OpticalPro, a RAW Converter I am using, it is as below:

Wishing the above could be useful to you.

 

[AlbertM43user]

Forget to answer the other question on how to decide a keeper or not.

If shoot in RAW only, as you can only see the embedded JPG in camera, the small JPG might hide up the shortage of the shot. But generally we can see the composition, the light distribution, contrast, the saturation, the DoF, focusing condition and WB etc (although most of them could be edited in post) that might not be too difficult to decide a keeper. Please keep in mind the headroom you might push later on conversion too.

In fact the LV should show you a 80~90% accurate image in evf before you take the shot. So I usually shall not playback the shot because I know how it will be before I hit the shutter button.

If you shoot RAW+JPG, you can see a better JPG and it is actually the output you has captured. By applying your expectation on RAW's headroom, you could have a better image on what final output (from RAW) you can get.

 

[AlbertM43user]

Sorry can't find a way to edit the posted thread.

Forget to answer the other question on how to decide a keeper or not.

If shoot in RAW only, as you can only see the embedded JPG in camera, the small JPG might hide up the shortage of the shot. But generally we can see the composition, the light distribution, contrast, the saturation, the DoF, focusing condition and WB etc (although most of them could be edited in post) that might not be too difficult to decide a keeper. Please keep in mind the headroom you might push later on conversion too.

The above should read:

"By the end, if you use a compatible RAW Converter, e.g. Silkypix, you can get a converted JPG very similar to the playback view in evf/LCD, i.e. the JPG setting you originally used. If you would use a generic RAW converter, then you have to work it out manually."

In fact the LV should show you a 80~90% accurate image in evf before you take the shot. So I usually shall not playback the shot because I know how it will be before I hit the shutter button.

If you shoot RAW+JPG, you can see a better JPG and it is actually the output you has captured. By applying your expectation on RAW's headroom, you could have a better image on what final output (from RAW) you can get.

 

[flycaster]

Wow, Albert, do appreciate all your efforts in trying to help me wrap my mind around this issue. So, the evf image is jpg, even though I'm shooting raw. And, if I shoot raw+fine jpg, I will get a better idea of the shot. But, will that fine jpg will be dependent on the camera's jpg settings? I think so; and if so, then what shows will be dependent on the Quality setting (among other in-camera settings)??? As I shoot raw and use FastRawViewer to cull the raws, I think I'll just keep things the way they are, and cull from the computer software rather than the evf...knowing that I will have a bit of headway when in post. But, then again, it appears that having a fine jpg in the evf can be advantageous. BTW, after culling I go to Photolab 5 Elite and then Photoshop Essentials 18.