Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JPG vs RAW workflow: why different?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JPG vs RAW workflow: why different?

    Hello,

    Sorry when asking something very obvious, which might have been discussed here before: I try to migrate defenitely to ACDSee and can't understand the paradigm behind processing the images -

    When developing RAWs, ACDSee creates the "developed" folder, putting the developed files into it: I don't like it, as it forces me to give R/W permissions on my samba share, instead of giving me an option where to place those files. But ok, I could live with that, makes somehow sense to find those developed JPGs there.

    But when "developing" JPGs, ACDSee creates the "originals" folder, replacing the original JPG files with those being developed and keeping the originals in the special folder; I really don't like it at all (I hate it actually).

    So in both cases, ACDSee messes around with the very original files/structures at the quite "holy" photo source location, which I try to keep R/O when not uploading images onto it. I could maybe somehow get used to that, although I hate it, but:

    What I really don't understand is why are these 2 scenarios handled differently? It makes no sense to have different workflow/directories just because of the file format, does it? The app could keep those JPGs as-is under the same folder as-is and put those developed JPGs into "developed", just like it's the case with the RAWs. It would be really much more logical like that, to keep all the _original_ files untouched and _developed_ put into "developed" (preferably into a configurable folder).

    My situation: I have pretty much both JPGs and RAWs as well - and I love ACDSee can mix them into one experience, through "Photos" view and such, so I see all my pictures regardless if they came from my "real" camera or from my or my wife's mobile-synced JPG archive: like that, I have all my pictures under control at one single place. ACDSee handles the NAS-connected scenario really superb, I can even access my LAN by OpenVPN and it just flies, thumbnails, searches - everything, instantly: just love it! No other DAM app can do this, I switched away from LR and later also from C1, which both were not even close how well is this done in ACDSee. But when developing images, it drives me quite crazy TBH, I try to understand/like it, but it's not mature I guess.

    Any inputs on this?

    Thank you,
    Andrej

  • #2
    It might be a matter of both "philosophy" about photo processing , which is RAW centric and software version management, where one version excludes the "develop" functionality and another one doesn't. ACDSee considers, arguably, some functions necessary to generate a JPEG, and others to "alter" an already existing JPEG (local functions perhaps?). Special effects for e.g. would fall under the "alter" category, whereas white balance a "develop" function. As such, it considers JPEGs the desired end result. Over time the line between generate and alter has become blurred. I for one would like to see modified JPEGs saved into a "processed" folder instead as to differentiate OOC JPEGs from post-processed ones, but also understand why they chose to leave them where they were originally saved (arguably where intended to remain once developed) and save a backup copy in the "original" folder along with the development parameter sidecar file. I tend to PP most of my JPEGs, but many don't and that perhaps makes more sense to them.
    Last edited by Regor250; 12-10-2020, 12:19 PM.

    Comment

    Working...
    X