2

I took hundreds of photos with my camera in RAW+JPEG mode. I now wish to find them so that I can compare them, see if I really like the camera's JPEG rendering and if not, delete them.

Unfortunately, my Lightroom library is 80GB in size, so it's hard to find JPEGs for which I also have the RAW, amidst all the other files that are RAW only or JPEG only.

I wish Lightroom had an option to show only photos that exist in both RAW and JPEG formats. But I don't find such an option.

How then, do I find them, on Lightroom 5.7 on macOS Sierra?

Note that I have Lightroom configured to treat RAW and JPEG as separate photos.

This question is different from this one, because I want to examine both files, not blindly delete the JPEG if the RAW exists.

  • 1
    My Canon 700D uses same names for both .cr2 and .jpeg files. If you list through the folder, you shoud see both images next to each other. – Crowley Jan 3 '17 at 16:39
  • Please see the updated question for why that's hard, in an 80GB library. – Vaddadi Kartick Jan 4 '17 at 6:05
  • If you know your code, photo.stackexchange.com/questions/16401/… is 99% of your answer. If you are interested, I can easily modify it to return a HTML file including jpeg image and link to the position of files on your hard drive – Olivier Jan 4 '17 at 6:36
  • @VaddadiKartick If you list the files sorted by file name it's not hard at all. The two images with the same name other than the different extensions will always be immediately next to one another. – Michael C Jan 5 '17 at 2:10
  • It's still hard when you have thousands of photos. Needs a little scripting, which I've posted as a separate answer. – Vaddadi Kartick Jan 27 '17 at 14:39
2

The question asks for a way to find RAW+JPEGs in Lightroom, but I couldn't find a way. So I had to settle for a script, in Ruby.

This finds files that exist in multiple formats. That is, files with the same name and location but different extensions:

require 'set'

list = Dir['**/*.*']

set = Set.new
dupes = Set.new

for path in list
    down = path.downcase
    if down.end_with?("xmp") or down.end_with?("thm")
        next
    end
    pathWithoutExt = path.rpartition('.').first
    if set.add?(pathWithoutExt) == nil
        dupes.add(pathWithoutExt)
    end
end

for dupe in dupes
    puts dupe
end

I tested this on Ruby 2.4 on macOS Sierra. It turns out I have no RAW+JPEGs, but I did have files in both JPEG and PNG format.

This script is not photography-specific and can find, say, files that exist in both txt and docx formats.

1

In the Library view/Grid, Lightroom will by default sort your images by date taken timestamp. If you ask Lightroom to show both JPEG and RAW (Preferences>General> Treat JPEG files next to raw files as separate photos'), then the JPEG will be right next to the corresponding RAW file, and you can compare them side by side in the Library view.

  • Please see the updated question for why that doesn't work. – Vaddadi Kartick Jan 4 '17 at 4:13
1

Probably you should change the Windows Control Panel at Folder Options, at the View tab there, to UNCHECK the option to HIDE EXTENSIONS. Then the file name you see will include the .JPG or the raw file name extension. Then you know what's what. Why we would ever want to hide extensions is mystery to me. :)

  • 1
    It doesn't really answer the question, so by the book I shouldn't upvote it. But dang, I can't help it. I couldn't agree more. – Michael C Jan 3 '17 at 23:47
  • I finally realize now that the question says Mac, so my bad. However, my understanding (without knowing) is that the Mac also hides file name extensions by default? My own notion is that the purpose of this philosophy is just to not confuse the novices, hiding instead of explaining to them what can help. – WayneF Jan 4 '17 at 2:54
  • I updated the question. Please take a look. It's not about file extensions. – Vaddadi Kartick Jan 4 '17 at 3:20
  • With hidden extension you can hunt BFUs with malicious cute_kittens.pps.exe attachments. – Crowley Jan 4 '17 at 15:17
  • The question was about the Mac and this answer is off-topic. – Lumigraphics Jan 28 '17 at 1:13
0

Unfortunately, the RAW+JPEGs are lost amidst the RAWs and the JPEGs

This is a confusing statement. When you choose "RAW+JPEG" while shooting, this means the camera will save a RAW file and it will save a JPEG file. Your statement makes it look like you are searching for something called "RAW+JPEGs" that is separate from all the RAW and JPEG files.

You mentioned comparing in Lightroom. When you import into Lightroom there is an option to avoid importing duplicates. If that option is checked, then in the preview thumbnails (before you begin the import), you will only see the RAW files. Lightroom is smart enough to know you'll probably want to import and work with the RAW files rather than the JPEG files. So be sure to uncheck this option when importing.

Then, once imported, you will see 2 copies of each photo - one from the RAW and one from the JPEG. Bear in mind the RAW copy is in fact a jpeg created by Lightroom so you can see the RAW. Each time you modify the image it generates a new JPEG to show to you. You cannot directly compare RAW files - because RAW files consiste only really of raw data about each pixel. At some point you need something to interpret this and produce an image file - whether it's your camera as it shoots, or Lightroom as it renders previews, or Lightroom as you export a JPEG created from your RAW file.

So - you could, for example, export all your RAW files as JPEGs of the same dimensions that your camera produced, then look at those side by side in your Windows explorer, or in lightroom. However, one of the major benefits of RAW is that you don't have to choose the JPEG colour space (which is a limitation on the number of colours available in your file) until after you carry out your processing steps. This means you have a lot more flexibility and leeway in adjusting things like contrast and exposure (as well as saturation, etc) while working on RAW files. If you attempt such edits only on the JPEG produced by the camera you will be much more limited in rescuing overexposed and underexposed areas, for starters, and in playing with contrast.

So, actually, you wrote:

I now wish to find them so that I can compare them, see if I really like the camera's JPEG rendering and if not, delete them

Bear in mind your camera will have applied algorithms to produce its JPEGs - this means there has been some automated intelligence applied to make the image look as good as the software can make it. Your RAW files will have none of this and will almost certainly look worse than your camera's JPEGs, straight out of the box! Don't be fooled into thinking "well why bother taking RAW at all, especially as the file sizes are huge and chew through my memory card"! The real benefit is as I described above - in gaining greater leeway while post-process editing your images.

I think the question becomes: do I want to spend the time post processing, or am I happy enough with the JPEGs straight out of the camera?

PS. Also bear in mind when you choose RAW+JPEG, the camera will likely produce the smallest, lowest quality JPEG it can (because it knows you have the full RAW file available). If you choose JPEG only you may be able to choose a larger JPEG size and/or higher JPEG quality. These choices will affect how the shots look "out of the camera", so while the JPEGS you get from RAW+JPEG might not be acceptable to you, if you choose JPEG, large size, high quality only, maybe they will be acceptable.

  • The most flexibility comparing editing raw to jpeg is color temperature and white balance. – Michael C Jan 3 '17 at 23:50
  • 2
    Your P.S. is not the case at all, at least with Canon cameras that can save raw files. All of the same JPEG options are available with RAW+JPEG as are available with JPEG. – Michael C Jan 3 '17 at 23:51
  • Your PS is not the case on the Sony, either. Please see the updated question — it's a question of file management, finding the ones I want amidst thousands of files. I came up with a script that does so, which I've posted as a separate answer. – Vaddadi Kartick Jan 27 '17 at 14:43
0

In Library, do a find, command F, parameters will be text, any searchable field, contains all and enter ".jpg" without the quotes.... you will see files that are JPG

If you wish to see them in finder, option click on a file and you get a drop down for "show in finder" if you want to compare it might be easier to open them in Photoshop. Compare in LR is nice but it's hard to unstack JPG/RAW and know you are seeing them

  • Thanks, but the question was not how to find JPEGs. The question was how to find JPEGs that also have a corresponding RAW. Your answer also shows JPEGs that have no corresponding RAW. – Vaddadi Kartick Jan 4 '17 at 6:01

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.