ASP image quality vs. in-camera JPEG

[Matagalpa]

My impression is that ASP (1.3 in my case) doesn't deliver better image quality than in-camera JPEGs (Sony A77, Minolta 7D), at least when it comes to properly exposed and white-balanced pictures. I regularly get better image quality with other RAW conversion applications (my favorites being RawTherapee and DxO) than the in-camera JPEG, but not with ASP. Do you have a different experience?

[dFlyer]

ASP is a raw converter. Try shooting RAW and converting.

[Matagalpa]

That's what I did of course. What else would I do with it?

[peteln]

Same here with D3, D600 and D800e files.
Now I mostly shoot JPEG unless I see the need for substantial post-processing when shooting.

[FalCT60]

As far as I know, cameras internal processing is set as to match the tastes of people, not te reality.
I had the same kind of discussion with a friend who owns a D700 too. He said that, when he shot raw + jpeg, he liked the jpegs much more than the raws. That, on the display of the camera.
So I proposed him to compare what could be : results on a wide screen from a scene shot with same camera settings, him jpeg an me raw, on a calibrated screen.
WB to sun, as it was sunny outdoor where whe took the photo, both cmaeras on tripod and remote controlled.
After loading both pictures in ASP, he carefully compared them and, after a few minutes, said to me :
"OK, your photo (the raw) renders much more the truth of the scene, but mine (the jpeg) is much more what I like".

[df]

Yes, and heaven forbid anyone get's what they like out of their camera.

[Matagalpa]

As far as I know, cameras internal processing is set as to match the tastes of people, not te reality.

So to paraphrase, what you're basically saying is that the reason the output I'm able to get with ASP looks worse than in-camera JPEG, DxO and RawTherapee is that ASP is the only conversion that aims for "real" rather than "pleasing"?

[FalCT60]

I didn't mention any other converter but ASP.
The comparison was exclusively between ASP and internal camera processing, which tends to show ASP as more neutral than Nikon (in our case) soup.
I can't presume of other software behaviour.

[Matagalpa]

Ok, but my original post (if not the title) clearly stated that I'm getting better results with these two RAW converters and (to my surprise) also with the in-camera JPEGs. Playing with v2.0 briefly doesn't make me feel that image quality is improved, and Corel's own marketing tends to focus more on performance improvements (an area where ASP was already better than anything else) and not where the improvement is actually needed - in the image quality department.

ASP is probably not useful for me at its current state, but I was curious if others have a different experience, as it could be camera-specific. I guess the answer is no. The in-camera JPEGs from other cameras are also equal or better to what ASP can deliver, at least when it comes to properly exposed and white-balanced pictures. Well, at least I bought my license on a sale...

[thomascheng]

I can only speak as an ASP 2 user. Hmm, that question will depend on a lot of factors. Your camera always starts with the raw and converts it to Jpeg internally. ASP, just takes the raw and lets you convert it manually. However, the question you should be specifically asking is how does manual ASP Sharpness, Saturation, and Noise reduction, compared to the automatic in-camera application. If you camera has a log mode that lets you automatically retrain highlight and lift shadows, then you need to compare that too.

From my personal experience, I really enjoy using ASP 2, there are a few annoying bugs and hiccups in the program, but for the most part, it doesn't seem affect my image quality. I use to be a Lightroom user, but switch since their rental only system would lock me into their program. If I stop paying the monthly fee, I would lose access to my adjustments. ASP2 is a great program, that just needs a bit more QA to make it super solid. Deleting images in your catalog is slow process. I've used Raw Therapee, it's too slow and clunky for me.

Also, there are a bunch of free plugins with ASP that are absolute essential, you should download them to make you image even better. I would suggesting getting Bez to deal with highlight tones better. In combination with exposure and highlights sliders, it will make a huge difference in dealing with blow out skies or backgrounds