35

In my opinion, none of the other answers addresses the obvious misconception in the question: There is no use in converting a JPG (comparatively low quality) to a RAW file (high quality), because you do not gain anything. The reason why people shoot in RAW is that, as others have stated, RAW captures all the sensor data and saves it in a file. JPGs have ...


19

In the absence of real raw files, the JPG is your "raw". Most image editors, including Lightroom, can open or import JPGs. You may choose to save in another format while editing, but do not lose or destroy the original JPGs. Also take care not to save over the original files. It is possible to convert JPGs to DNG. But it's usually used to test and develop ...


4

It seems extremely unlikely that Lightroom would include a setting (whether obvious or secret) to deal with this obscure situation. I think you're in a situation where the old joke applies: Doctor! It hurts when I do this! Well, don't do that. You have a workaround. I'd focus on making that as painless as possible.


4

"Haze" from the standpoint of landscape photography is not only natural but also necessary for pictorial perception. Key to this understanding is to not consider it as a fault but as an attribute. This is easier if you consider the term used by artists in creating a similar view. Aerial perspective is the term used for the appreciation of depth within the ...


4

You can't "fix" distance haze. You can try compensate for it, but you cannot fix it. None of what follows is in any way definitive, it's 5 mins in Photoshop & really rough The method I would have used for your posted image would be HDR - 3 exposures, merge afterwards - but we're too late for that. So we're left with 'fudging'. If you mask out the '...


2

Basically no. To explain a bit further a raw image stores the input as it comes off the sensor, so each pixel will have a single colour and 12-16 bit value depending on your model of camera. A jpeg file will have 3 colours for each pixel with every chanel at 8 bits. In saving as a jpeg the camera will have taken the raw data and processed it to jpeg ...


2

I imported several .cr2 images into Lightroom, exported them as .tif without any adjustments... There's no such thing. If you are seeing an image on your screen and/or exporting a TIFF, the raw data is being interpreted in one of a countless number of possible legitimate interpretations. If you "made no adjustments" it just means you are leaving the default ...


1

I've used both Snapseed and Lightroom for some time. I also made prints from images that were post-processed in Lightroom and processed in Snapseed. As I recall, I never noticed a visual "quality" drop by Snapseed. When I browse (digitally) my final images and show them to clients, no one can tell which ones were edited in Lightroom, VSCO (another mobile ...


1

RAW files contain ALL the image information that was captured by the sensor. The conversion, or export, to JPG removes some of that information in the name of making a file that is smaller in size and that (normally) looks good in its native (Saved As...) resolution. Basically, a JPG only has enough info to display the image. Once that JPG is created, the ...


1

What you may be seeing is fake banding created by Photoshop. It takes shortcuts to display layered files more quickly that sometime affect the actual appearance of the image on the screen. To check to see if there is actual banding, you can either zoom into the image to 100% or temporarily flatten the image to remove the layers. If what you are seeing is a ...


1

Unfortunately, I think you have two mutually exclusive goals. It is much easier to do this outside Lightroom, by exporting the keywords to a file. It can then be edited in any plain text editor and imported back into LR. Voila! (See https://lightroomkillertips.com/exporting-importing-keyword-list/ for import/export details. See https://photo-keywords.com/...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible