What does “Fine” mean compared with JPEG and RAW on a camera?
Asked 4/20/2019
3 views
2 answers
0
My camera offers RAW and JPEG quality settings such as “Fine.” I understand RAW keeps the original sensor data, while JPEG is processed and compressed in-camera.
I was told that shooting “Fine” can be better because the camera’s display preview already reflects the manufacturer’s processing, so if I like what I see there, I may prefer to let the camera create the final image instead of reprocessing RAW later.
What exactly is “Fine” in this context? How is it different from JPEG, and when would “Fine” JPEG be a good choice versus RAW or RAW+JPEG?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
7y ago
2 Answers
24
you don't have to reproduce the algorithms that the camera is running to render your photo on the small display on the camera.
This all depends on how much you value what is shown on the camera's LCD - it isn't any more "right" than any other algorithm. If you personally happen to like Sony's algorithm, then you may find it advantageous, although you can probably get very close if you use Sony's RAW processing pipeline. If you don't particularly like Sony's algorithm, then who cares if you can reproduce it or not?
How is fine different from JPG
Fine is not "different" from JPG - it is a subclass of JPG with the lowest compression options (unless "superfine" or something exists on your camera).
While there are advantages to shooting JPG over RAW, principally larger buffer sizes and less time in your processing pipeline, it doesn't sound like you're being given good advice here.
Originally by user11371. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user11371
7y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
“Fine” is usually not a separate format from JPEG — it’s a JPEG quality setting, typically meaning lower compression and higher file quality than “Normal.” Some cameras may also offer “Extra Fine” or similar.
RAW and JPEG serve different goals:
- RAW keeps more original sensor data and gives you more flexibility for editing later.
- JPEG applies the camera maker’s processing (color, contrast, sharpening, noise reduction, etc.) and then compresses the result.
So your mentor’s point is really about workflow and taste: if you like the camera’s rendering and want ready-to-use files, Fine JPEG can be a good choice. But the camera preview is not inherently “more correct” than what you could do from RAW; it’s just the camera’s interpretation.
A Fine JPEG can be an excellent balance when you want smaller files, faster writing, larger effective buffer capacity, and minimal post-processing. RAW is better when you want maximum editing latitude. If your camera supports it, RAW+JPEG is often the safest compromise: you get the camera’s processed JPEG and still keep the RAW for later.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI7y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why does Lightroom show a low-quality preview even though my RAW files are lossless?
What data does the Canon 5D Mark III use for the histogram in Live View?
Why use UniWB if final white balance can still clip channels?
Does Lightroom edit compressed RAW files slower than uncompressed RAW files?
Why do my RAW moon photos change color in Lightroom after import?