How to convert RAW files to JPEG?

[rkulkarni]

I have a bunch of raw files and I am not sure how to convert them to JPEG.  I sure would appreciate some help with this.  Thank you

[Skirball]

I think Lightroom is the best all around program for general workflow, but there are many options out there.

If you're looking for a free program I've had good luck with Picasa's standalone editor.  I'm sure there are dozens of other free choices that will work fine.  What camera are they from?

[alxkohn]

I have also used picasa,, think I'll try it again.  I just got annother canon (50D) and am trying to "stick to" raw format.

[ebiggs1]

"I have also used picasa,, think I'll try it again.  I just got annother canon (50D) and am trying to "stick to" raw format."

If your goal is to use on the web, RAW will not help.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I have also used picasa,, think I'll try it again.  I just got annother canon (50D) and am trying to "stick to" raw format."

If your goal is to use on the web, RAW will not help.

---

If you're good enough to shoot JPEGs with just the right exposure level, tone quality, and white balance every time, then I suppose you don't gain that much by using RAW. I'm not that good, and I'll bet there are many in this forum who aren't either. My experience, with the editors I've used, is that editing a JPEG is more difficult, and the result less satisfactory, than editing a RAW file. So even when I'm creating images for use on the Web, I find that RAW definitely does help.

[ebiggs1]

" I'm not that good, and I'll bet there are many in this forum who aren't either."

And neither is the internet.  That is the point.  Do you really think Fakebook benefits from RAW conversion?  

[TCampbell]

BTW --  Canon Digital Photo Professional (aka DPP) has a "batch" mode in which you can point it at a whole directory full of RAW images and let it churn.  I believe you get the choice of converting either to TIFF (larger, but non-lossy) or JPEG (for more compressed, but lossy).

[RobertTheFat]

---

@TCampbell wrote:

BTW --  Canon Digital Photo Professional (aka DPP) has a "batch" mode in which you can point it at a whole directory full of RAW images and let it churn.  I believe you get the choice of converting either to TIFF (larger, but non-lossy) or JPEG (for more compressed, but lossy).

---

You can choose TIFF (huge) or any of ten quality levels of JPEG. What you can't do (but I wish you could) is tell the program how large a JPEG file you can tolerate, and/or the minimum number of pixels in either dimension, and have it determine the highest quality level that will work. I don't care how long it takes to do the calculation; it's bound to be faster than iterating like one has to do now.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

" I'm not that good, and I'll bet there are many in this forum who aren't either."

And neither is the internet.  That is the point.  Do you really think Fakebook benefits from RAW conversion?  

---

I guess that is what I'm saying. I'm not a great fan of mediocrity, as it happens. I can't remember when, if ever, I looked at a picture on Facebook. But in general, anyone who can't see the difference between correct and incorrect exposure and color values on the Web needs to find a good optometrist.

[ebiggs1]

"... correct and incorrect exposure and color values on the Web needs to find a good optometrist."

And if they can tell the diffrence between a jpg or RAW edit on Fakebook, they are truly gifted.