04-19-2025
11:18 PM
- last edited on
04-22-2025
09:03 AM
by
Danny
I shoot the Canon 7D and this camera I've typically used for wildlife and jpeg was always good enough for my purposes. Recently I've been shooting in RAW plus jpeg and I noticed this evening after shooting images of swans that the RAW files all showed blown out areas that I was unable to recover. However, the jpegs showed detail in the highlights and shadows. I'd expect it to be the opposite. This makes no sense to me.
Solved! Go to Solution.
04-21-2025 09:15 AM
04-21-2025 09:51 AM
Those options from your screen shots don't show up for me and every time I post links, they disappear after a couple minutes so I'm just going to give up. As long as I continue shooting in both RAW and jpeg I'll still have the 2 options to go with. Thanks anyway.
04-21-2025 10:26 AM
Sorry, the spam filter rejected the links. I released them. 😊
04-21-2025 10:31 AM - edited 04-21-2025 10:32 AM
So that's what happened. Thank you. I was confused. I see my links from my attempt last night showed up now too.
04-21-2025 11:15 AM
When I open _MG_5432.CR2 in Canon DPP software, I notice it was shot with picture style "Neutral" and white balance auto and that the highlights on the neck of the bird are clipped.
Changing picture style to "Standard" and white balance to "Daylight" I get
If it were my photo, I would change input white point in DPP from:
to:
And then the dynamic range is increased slightly and nothing is clipped.
Other software might choose dynamic range differently, but DPP does it much like the camera does it if the picture style is "Standard" in the camera. I would suggest not using picture style "Neutral" in the camera if one wants to use the out of camera JPG file instead of the CR2 file.
Other ways to deal with the clipped highlights while editing the CR2 file include
I hope some of this helps.
04-21-2025 12:23 PM
I'm not really that concerned re: the processing, especially with the highlight that far gone in the Raw files. There is nothing to recover there. I'm interested in why the jpegs retained more data than the Raw files but it doesn't happen every time. I went out and shot a couple ducks and a turtle this morning and the raw files looked much better in a few of the photos but in a couple of them, the jpegs looked better. I'll just learn to live with it. At least one of the files is typically looking good.
04-21-2025 01:24 PM
@MNshutterbug wrote:
I'm not really that concerned re: the processing, especially with the highlight that far gone in the Raw files. There is nothing to recover there. I'm interested in why the jpegs retained more data than the Raw files but it doesn't happen every time. I went out and shot a couple ducks and a turtle this morning and the raw files looked much better in a few of the photos but in a couple of them, the jpegs looked better. I'll just learn to live with it. At least one of the files is typically looking good.
The JPG file did not retain more data. There is much more data in the raw file, but software decides which data to discard when creating an image from the data. Use different software to view the raw file or tell the software what you want. The picture style "Neutral" caused the contrast to be reduced. The software you were using to view the CR2 file did not reduce the contrast like in the out of camera JPG.
I suggest using picture style "Standard" or maybe "Landscape" and using exposure compensation to choose between highlights and shadows for auto exposure.
04-22-2025 03:10 AM - edited 04-22-2025 03:25 AM
@MNshutterbug wrote:
I'm not really that concerned re: the processing, especially with the highlight that far gone in the Raw files. There is nothing to recover there. I'm interested in why the jpegs retained more data than the Raw files but it doesn't happen every time. I went out and shot a couple ducks and a turtle this morning and the raw files looked much better in a few of the photos but in a couple of them, the jpegs looked better. I'll just learn to live with it. At least one of the files is typically looking good.
Reconstructed from non clipped highlights
Raw clipping
Something like this?
One clipped colour channel is often workable. Then you can reconstruct details from the other two colour channels. The problem is when all three are clipped, as you can see to the right, even if it still looks OK.
Your second raw file looks good. Only green channel and not much at all.
04-23-2025 10:45 AM
"Recently I've been shooting in RAW plus jpeg ... the RAW files all showed blown out areas... the jpegs showed detail in the highlights and shadows. ... This makes no sense to me."
It makes perfect sense to me. To answer your specific question, the only real thing that a raw file has to have is exposure and focus. That's all. A jpg is a processed version (by the camera with settings of your choice) of that raw file so it has the advantage of being processed by your camera. People get confused by that because in certain situations or conditions the jpg looks better.
The big difference here is who or what does the editing or processing. You or the camera. I didn't see it but did you mention what editor you use? You may need a few tips on how to use your software.
I haven't shot a single jpg for over 20 years they just are not necessary. I use Photoshop and Lightroom, BTW. The most current version of Adobe Raw is fantastic.
04-23-2025 10:52 AM
All the examples look like small jpg can you u/l a full raw file.?
05/13/2026: New firmware updates are available.
EOS R5 Mark II - Version 1.3.0
EOS R6 Mark II - Version 1.7.0
03/17/2026: New firmware updates are available.
SELPHY CP1500 - Version 1.0.7.0
01/20/2026: New firmware updates are available.
10/15/2025: New firmware updates are available.
Speedlite EL-5 - Version 1.2.0
Speedlite EL-1 - Version 1.1.0
Speedlite Transmitter ST-E10 - Version 1.2.0
Canon U.S.A Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part without permission is prohibited.