The Auto, the Jpg and The Dunning-Kruger Effect

[@atselykovskiy]

Magnum photographer Pinkhassov told many times that he shoots in P mode in JPEG :) Later almost all his work done for public was shot on IPhone

[@johnlucas836]

Very thought provoking Eddy! Thank you!

[@SummersSnaps]

Thanks! Hit Like & Subscribe! :D

[@jbp6759]

Interesting discussion. You unpacked a lot there. Using Auto to stay in the moment more and focus more on capturing the moment more than fiddling with settings was an interesting thought to me. I tend to shoot TAv on Pentax, and when I want to be more in the moment and worry about settings less I'll shoot Av. Sometimes P. I'll throw Auto in the mix and see how it goes. Sometimes I get too focused on settings and am not enjoying (or capturing!) the moment before me like I should be. The other thing that really hit home was Dunning Kruger effect and giving advice. Recently I've become aware of this and now see it everywhere. I have too many hobbies and that effect exists in them all - in fact it is the predominant state of mind! It results in a hive mind. Ask a question and you will get a consensus answer... which may not be right. Dissenters are either complete greenhorns or truly seasoned pros who actually know what they're talking about! But both will get flack from the consensus mob. So I tell myself not to assume I'm right about anything, and that there are exceptions to everything, to try to stay out of the hive mind myself.

[@SummersSnaps]

Great, I'm glad you liked it. I just feel what I once knew was maybe not as concrete or solid a foundation as I once thought and over the course of the last year I have enjoyed learning more, growing more and adopting some of these principles to my own work. It's a conversation I think worth having and sharing. Thanks for contributing.

[@shred3005]

Hey Eddy, with imparting advice, it reminds me of the old saying that "you learn more from listening than speaking". I would say though that we all learn more from a two way conversation. Always be a teacher, always be a student. As far RAW vs JPEG, the things to remember are; (1) some people want or need to keep a digital negative library. Mine is in Lightroom and dates back to 2004 (although Lightroom 1.0 didn't release until 2007 I backfilled my earlier raw files), everything is tagged, many files are geotagged and I can easily pull up anything from the last 18 yrs. I've had to move the Library from internal to external to Raid NAS at times but it's intact. (2) I've been on a similar journey with Pentax since 2004 (and Olympus OM-D from 2016) and last year got my first Fuji. I agree with you about the revelation with Fuji and their film simulations - I didn't realise there was a whole other world of serious JPEG shooters out there doing exciting things as I thought JPEG shooters were rank amateurs! But you have to remember that in camera JPEG processing as gotten very good (and Fuji has several versions of special sauce on theirs) but it wasn't always that way. Back in the mid 2000s we were trying to squeeze ever bit of quality out of our 6mp photos, in raw editors still had a long way to go (back then Capture One was considered about the best in the Pentax world but many were using Adobe Camera raw plug in for Photoshop) so the photo community was hanging on every raw editor release hoping to get a bit more out of their 6mp, 8mp and then mp raw files. Going back to your old raw file from a year or two earlier you could get more out of it with from newer raw editors. In 2005 many of us jumped onto Pixmantec RawShooter because of it's raw workflow and it did a better job or our raw files. Still trying to squeeze everything out of our 6mp 3008 x 2008 pixel files, RawShooter actually found 3016 x 2016 pixels in our PEF files. We were that desperate to make the most of the somewhat limited sensors at the time. And the in camera JPEG processing at the time was so, so . (of course Pixmantec RawShooter was purchased by Adobe in 2006 while they were developing Lightroom, RawShooter disappeared and us license holders received Lightroom 1.0 for free). So that is where the idea of serious photographers shooting raw came from. Trying to make the most of limited sensors and in camera processing power of the early days of DSLRs. I agree with you that many of us have held onto that way of doing things. I don't see me changing from raw but since the Pentax K-1 with dual SD slots I've switched to RAW + JPEG to different SD cards. It's insurance (a lost a whole corrupted SD card of precious holidays photos with our kids but at least had JPEG back up on the 2nd card) but also fast sharing and cloud backup of the JPEGs. But I've still got that massive raw library that I'd be devastated if I lost it.

[@warrenmerrill532]

Your timing for this video could not be more perfect and I absolutely get it Eddy. There is a place and time for the Green Mode, even among professionals.

[@jschoonj]

An LED backlight, Eddy. You're moving up in the world :-D

[@SummersSnaps]

Stole it from the kids room xD

[@amyl.9477]

If your first Pentax entry-level was the K50 that explains a lot. My first DSLR was the K100D and I just could not trust what I saw on the screen; I had to shoot in RAW or else every single picture I got would be bad. I don’t remember where I first read this but I read shooting JPEG was like shooting transparencies and shooting transparencies was hard and therefore shooting JPEG was harder than shooting RAW. So I don’t think equating JPEG with noobs would be fair; we shoot RAW precisely because (as you said at the end of the video) we don’t trust we’d get every parameter right when we shoot

[@SummersSnaps]

You're right, it's not fair and old me could be a jerk like that!

[@gillyb44]

I Eddy, thanks for the video. I just love the Jpegs from Fuji, there is still enough room to manipulate them, add a filter etc. It makes you work slower and try and get it right in camera as much as possible. Auto ISO is great i set the 3 different parameters. But here again on a Fuji camera its quick and easy to chose base if the camera doesnt pick it, but it usually does. I really dislike sitting in front of a computer manipulating a file when the Jpeg alongside it can be almost perfect, with a certain look that could take ages to get like the jpeg. its only on certain shoots now that I choose to add Raw as well.

[@SummersSnaps]

Yes I think Jpgs have come a long way now and Fuji does them ever so well! Thanks for commenting Gill.

[@KobieMC]

I've shot in auto and it is useful to get some shots. The one area it always falls short is when it comes to fast action. It never picks a fast enough shutter speed. As for shooting jpeg, I've always just thought of photojournalists who need to get the shot to the studio immediately. It's much easier and more efficient to shoot in jpeg to get the files over as quickly as possible. So, nothing wrong with shooting jpeg... As long as you know what you're doing with the camera, the scene, and your style. Nice Light Sabre btw lol

[@SummersSnaps]

Ha! Thanks Kobie!

[@jackbeltane]

I learned photography with film and a dark room back in 1988, I hate photoshop photos to me they are a digital painting and not a photo. I love long exposure, so shutter speed and getting photos right in the camera are my priorities. I shoot raw and edit Lightroom, The best photos are ones you can create in your mind before you click the shutter button. Auto I do use, normally as a quick shot before I start setting up for a 1 minute photo. I also carry a point of shoot in the bag, it’s creative frames and features can be helpful and fun. Avoid camera snobs on social media, the art of photography is finding your style and creating photos to suit your style.

[@SummersSnaps]

Absolutely, there are no rights and wrongs here, except when you have acted and behaved as I once did with a certain amount of assumptions to someone shooting Jpgs and Autos. Sometimes it's great being proven wrong. Thanks for commenting Jack.

[@jackbeltane]

@@SummersSnaps I shoot raw on Pentax, I shoot jpeg on Olympus and LUMIX, I carry three cameras in my bag but when doing a long 30 seconds to a minute photo it’s handy to have another camera to take some more shots while I wait. I never tell anyone they are wrong, I just share on Facebook the settings I used and the style I was aiming for

[@lelanddyer9461]

I used to shoot auto on my istDL and K30 until I started a job when I was 24 and ran into a Canon snob who mocked my usage of Auto. Looking back it was a good turn for me to get back into learning the exposure tripod, but also reflecting, I was spending more time composing than worrying about exposure. Also, the Canon snob guy was kind of terrible at posing people and groups so I guess my time not thinking about exposure was well spent.

[@Amithrius]

What on earth is the exposure tripod?

[@lelanddyer9461]

@@Amithrius the balance of ISO, shutter speed, and aperture. They all work together to make the exposure of an image. If one fails the whole image is toast.

[@sparkleglitch13]

I feel this. I’ve been trying to get use to autofocus the jest few months as I had it in my head that manual was the best way. I’m also using auto iso and auto shutter way more, I still tend to pick my aperture. I shoot RAW+JPG for the same reason you do, and agree you need to be really competent to consistently get good JPG results.

[@SummersSnaps]

I've always been an Av guy, I just have it very defined and well implemented. I also use Tv mode a lot at events, and TAv as well. Manual mode typically when doing landscape work when taking things casual and slow... but I think it's quite another thing to go full on Auto, especially at a paid wedding event, and he gets great results! Just goes to show... Thanks for contributing!

[@JohnJBloomfield]

My little Fuji XF10 has 2 auto modes - Auto and SR+ - SR+ I think is best thought of as intelligent auto - it can in theory tell if it's a portrait vs a landscape vs a macro and select the more 'appropriate / traditional'' aperture or shutter speed - I think the camera equivalent of a 'TCM' button from a godox trigger to switch auto to manual would be a great learning tool. When I shoot family stuff I generally shoot RAW+ as 99% of the time all I'm going to do is adjust the crop on the jpeg. You just have to take the time to program the jpeg profile to something you like, a control you only have in higher end cameras. It takes a lot of skill and confidence to shoot jpeg only. As with all things in photography there is no right or wrong - just did you get the result you wanted.

[@SummersSnaps]

Well said John.

[@stephenobermeier8374]

I that auto iso mode the first time today 🙂

[@SummersSnaps]

Weow... well I never... even the great Obermeier is evolving (or devolving lol)..

[@davidm5790]

Just an honest question, but how much has your shift been motivated by the annoying limitation of RAF files in lightroom? Fujifilm makes the most sense in terms of a system to use, but I never enjoyed working with the RAF files in lightroom. I always felt that my images came out quite terribly.

[@SummersSnaps]

This is a good question and deserving of its own video. When I started with Fuji I noticed IQ was not up to my prior experience (Pentax K1 and KP files specifically), but I have come to realise that Pentax have actually spoiled me for file manipulation and IQ, the brand does not get the respect it deserves from this perspective. Having said that... much of this comes down to learning the sensor of a camera (any camera and not just brand of camera as it can change from model to model). People would hark on about 'the worms' they saw with .RAF files and LR and hold LR at fault for not working well with X sensors, but something didn't sit right with me about this perspective, because I was seeing 'worms' in the Jpgs themselves and it would not matter which editor or program I used to inspect the Jpgs with, its a 'baked in Fuji worm thing'. What you start to learn is that different RAW editors approach things differently is all, and with Fuji .RAF files, in respect to worms and how to minimise or exclude them you should take the Details slider under 'Sharpening' right back to 0, and then increase the 'Amount' slider far more than what you might do with a non .RAF file. That I feel improves things substantially on the worm front. But there's more... I invested $40 into the LR plugin 'Iridient X Transformer' which will turn a .RAF into a DNG to use which pretty much resolves all the problems with .RAF files. Iridient also have a plethora of options as well to how it approaches the conversion so you can play around with things a lot till you get a DNG file from the .RAF that is more to your liking. So these two things in conjunction (the use of Iridient and a different approach to using the Details toolbox) can go a long way to producing far better results from Fuji files (in LR). It just took some time to figure this out. I now have plenty of RAW shots from Fuji that I am over the moon with from an IQ perspective, easily matching Pentax KP files. But back to the jpgs. The interesting thing here is that Fuji's default settings don't make a whole lot of sense to me. For example, the High ISO NR is a scale, from -4 to +4, and it's default is 0. That means at 0 it is applying SOME NR. Actually -4 means NO NR. So shouldn't the default be -4 (i.e. off?) and not 0?... Then have a look at Sharpening. It too is a scale from -4 to +4, with again 0 as default. This is a similar thing again with -4 being no Sharpening and 0 to having SOME sharpening applied. When I tested .RAF files against the Sharpening value of the Jpgs I found 0 consistently over sharpened (by quite a lot) compared to the .RAF files, I actually found a -2 or -1 Sharpening value to better match with the native sharpening of the .RAF file (at least with LR's +40 default Sharpening value). When I have used filmsim recipes that called for heavy Sharpening such as +2 or +4 this is when I have seen 'worms' on the Jpgs, it's a Fuji thing not a RAW editor handling thing. So my advice has been to set Sharpening at -2 as you can always increase sharpening on Jpgs better (in external software) than what the in camera Sharpening is doing, it's quite horrid imo, very blocky and wormy. So yeah, it takes TIME to learn a sensor, a camera and do a little investigating and testing. Some people lack this patience and that's fine, I get it (if it isn't great out of the box then that's on the brand). But most of the time with any sensor on any camera/brand it does take time to get to know it and understand where it falls apart, where it is strong and holds up and what settings inside the camera are ultimately detrimental and which ones are ok. Hope this helps.

[@davidm5790]

@@SummersSnapsthanks for your response eddy. I’ll try out some of the sharpening methods with my archived RAF files from 2 years ago. I saw in your review of the XT4 you talking about irident plug in. I guess it could be a solution if I delete the RAFs after making DNGs, that would be the only way for me to use it because otherwise the storage requirement is doubled. It’s frustrating since Fujifilm make the most feature packed cameras in their price bracket, but all the headache I’ve found in dealing with that ecosystem makes me want to use a worse camera from another brand just to simplify my workflow.

[@SummersSnaps]

@@davidm5790 I think you'll find even just understanding the Details tool in LR and how the Radius, Detail and Amount sliders all affect one another, with X trans sensor the approach needs to change a tad for better results. I've seen people produce worms and blocky sharpening results in C1 as well. Have a google because I found out about this not on my own but in some other articles and videos surrounding this subject. X trans does seem to do quite nicely on the colour front but perhaps it is sensitive to sharpening, it's not that you can't have sharp files you just have to sharpen a little differently. Like I said, it takes time to learn a camera and sensor. I treat my Fuji's a little differently to some others perhaps. For me it's my 'Autofocus' camera (even though Fuji are still quite far behind on the AF front compared to Canikony). I shoot Pentax as well and when it comes to IQ and dynamic range the Fuji just can't keep up. Some of that is just physics and sensor size differences. So Fuji becomes more of a 'capture the moment' tool, the RAW workflow comes from my Pentax's more so really I seldom use Iridient or work deep on a Fuji file. But I feel the discoveries I have made have helped me realise the absolute potential of the Fuji RAWs and their limits and it's really actually quite impressive for APS-C. Here's a couple of high res RAWs from the XT4 you can check out, good glass helps heaps too. You should be able to zoom in and check out the details on these images pretty decently. flic.kr/p/2mSKuZ5 flic.kr/p/2msrKHu flic.kr/p/2mXwZSb

[@davidm5790]

@@SummersSnaps thank you! Been a fan for a long time

[@GPadugan]

in 2024, we shouldn't have to shoot raw. The tech should (and in many cases is) able to produce a good image from a jpeg.

[@perin99]

Ha ha no. The main reason to shoot Raw and JPG is for the ability to fire off 100s of JPGs to an editor/art director - a bit like the old contact sheets. Auto on a pro camera is more for Reportage, where art doesn't come into it. The ability to shoot JPG only on a pro camera is usually for speed. My dad is a pretty famous photographer and my mum a model so I lived this stuff growing up 😊

[@perin99]

Sorry if that sounds pompous. Just use whatever works. I know someone who makes sublime images with her phone - can't get more auto than that.

[@westyavro]

Children entering during filming or this never happened and this is a clone of Eddy.

[@SummersSnaps]

Hehe, they were at skool! Where I should have been when I was there age! Instead I am a loser YTer!