Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Shooting Raw - A Few Questions  
User currently offlineDeltaAVL From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1893 posts, RR: 6
Posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3179 times:

Hi guys,

I spent today messing with my new 400D, reading the manual, and getting myself acquainted with the Canon software. I shot a lot of photos in RAW today, and I was surprised at the amount of work involved in converting RAW files to jpegs.

My main question is this - is it really necessary that I shoot in RAW? What are the advantages? Would the largest jpeg straight out of the camera be just as good?


Thanks!  Smile


"We break, We bend, With hand in hand, When hope is gone, Just hang on." -Guster
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKlintrepid From United States of America, joined May 2005, 124 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 3167 times:

In RAW you can change the white balance. You know if you leave the camera in florescent setting and shoot outdoors all of the pictures come out yellow. In RAW you could change that yellow color.
RAW is like a negative. Its all of the data. Whereas JPEG it is compressed.



~its a JEEP thang~
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1753 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 3167 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Michael Reichmann has a good guide you should read.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...rstanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4861 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3150 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DeltaAVL (Thread starter):
My main question is this - is it really necessary that I shoot in RAW? What are the advantages? Would the largest JPEG straight out of the camera be just as good?

Well, I don't know. When I got my 400D, I started shooting RAW + JPEG. I would only go out for a half hour or so at a time so it didn't matter to me that I could only get about 100 shots with my 2GB card. Because RAW just seemed like an extra step in my workflow, I started editing the large JPEG instead. I tried to make sure I got everything right in the camera so that I wouldn't need to use RAW and after a while I just set the camera on Large JPEG and forgot about RAW completely.

I have recently returned to shooting in RAW. I felt after having some surprising quality related rejections that I was better off having a RAW file to ensure I had the best quality possible and the option to fix some things that only RAW makes possible should I need to do so.

[Edited 2008-01-17 18:09:52]


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3144 times:



Quoting DeltaAVL (Thread starter):
My main question is this - is it really necessary that I shoot in RAW?

simple answer, No. Get your basic skills down, and you won't need it.


User currently offlineFly747 From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1497 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3128 times:

It's not really necessary. It can help you save some shots but once you can nail your exposures, you don't need to shoot RAW. I only use RAW for night shooting.

Ivan


User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3108 times:



Quoting Klintrepid (Reply 1):
In RAW you can change the white balance. You know if you leave the camera in florescent setting and shoot outdoors all of the pictures come out yellow. In RAW you could change that yellow color.
RAW is like a negative. Its all of the data. Whereas JPEG it is compressed.

Yep when you shoot in jpeg the second you press the shutter file is compressed and your camera's settings are locked in.

Plus I also find the jpeg to be too rich in contrast and saturation. Why if you have the choice would you pick jpeg? RAW just gives you much more flexability. You can fix color casts, save a pic if you didn't nail the exposure, shadow's, highlights etc. With the emergence of ACR and the technology why not take advantage of it. I don't think it's a matter of skills either. I know plenty of "Skillfull" photogs that shoot in raw. Maybe because they have CS2?  Big grin


User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4861 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3104 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6):
Why if you have the choice would you pick jpeg?

In my case, I was choosing JPEG for the increased memory capacity and the faster burst mode capability. My 400D/memory card can't write as fast shooting RAW and after a series of photos the camera is disabled for a good 10-15 seconds. There are pros and cons for choosing each format. I find that with photography there are many, many trade-offs. Give up this or that, to gain this or that...quality vs...etc.

[Edited 2008-01-17 22:00:52]


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3089 times:



Quoting DeltaAVL (Thread starter):
My main question is this - is it really necessary that I shoot in RAW?

Actually - YOU have to answer that question! What are you going to do with the images? If you're only going to upload to a.net or keep the pictures for yourself, then JPG is okay if your shooting skills are solid. But if you're going to do any really large printing (over 20x30 inches) or sell images to magazines and illustrators, then JPG won't cut it. Those sources will be looking for TIFF's with no compression, which you can convert from your RAW file.

B


User currently offlineJonathanJet From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 64 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3088 times:

Do they make a plug-in for Photoshop CS? I currently edit my RAW's in the Digital Photo Professional that came with my Canon 30D. Does anyone have a workflow for a RAW like the JPEG workflows? I would love to understand RAW better!

JonathanJet



I'd rather be shooting in Hawaii!
User currently offlineDeltaAVL From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1893 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3050 times:

Thanks, guys, for the comments.

There seems to be a pretty evenly split opinion here, with good reasons for choosing each format. However, since I only have Photoshop CS, I think I'll be sticking with L JPEGs. For now, at least.

Quoting JonathanJet (Reply 9):
Do they make a plug-in for Photoshop CS?

From what I've read elsewhere, no, but maybe an A.netter has some sort of backdoor method.



"We break, We bend, With hand in hand, When hope is gone, Just hang on." -Guster
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3048 times:



Quoting DeltaAVL (Thread starter):
is it really necessary that I shoot in RAW?

(1) Not if you know how to get the exposure correct out of the camera.

Quoting DeltaAVL (Thread starter):
What are the advantages?

(2) More ability to change exposqure parameters, such as white balance;
No loss of data so easier to make very big prints.

Quoting DeltaAVL (Thread starter):
Would the largest jpeg straight out of the camera be just as good?

(3) For uploading here, yes (subject to (1) above).



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2037 posts, RR: 32
Reply 12, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3031 times:

The exposure evangelists will come out of the woodwork and tell you that you don't need it, but that's not the whole story. I do find the white balance and different sharpness settings very handy for playing around with. Yes it is more work, and still won't save a shitty image, but the control can be interesting. Simple stuff like playing with different picture style and saturation presets can get pleasing results.

J



It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
User currently offlineLinco22 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1380 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3028 times:

I think working with RAW will improve your understanding of the editing process more if nothing else. I have been shooting RAW alot recently but that's because I'm an editing freak at the minute! Big grin

In reality JPEG is more than enough for web usage. As Jeff (as much as it pains me to say it  Wink ) is correct, nail the basics such as exposure, focus, WB, composition etc and you're pretty much there.

Good luck

Colin


User currently offlineMetroliner From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2007, 1067 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3028 times:



Quoting JonathanJet (Reply 9):
Do they make a plug-in for Photoshop CS?

Find and download Adobe Camera Raw - it's very good.  Smile

Toni



Set the controls for the heart of the Sun
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1753 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3022 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I don't think it's as simple as boiling it down to "Don't bother with RAW because you need to get it right in the camera" because you still need to get your exposure right with RAWs in the first place. Yes, you get more latitude to work with, but the thing about shooting JPEGs is that you've basically committed yourself to the exposure at the time, letting the camera make decisions for you. I prefer having more control. That's all it is really - a preference.

For me, I'm fine with shooting JPEGs for family gatherings and "unimportant" things that I don't want to spend time post processing. I also really like the look of Minolta JPEGs and always have; their SLRs were very similar to their Point n shoots which were very good in terms of color rendition.

But for serious images, I prefer having more control over the process. I always liked developing my own B&W film (when I had the facilities to do so) which gave me a little more control in how I wanted to push the image. It was a powerful tool when I was first learning photography. Editing RAWs gives me a similar kind of control, both in determining tone and color. It also gives you more flexibility to remove flaws from the image, like sensor fringing and chromatic aberrations. Editing RAWs also gives you much more flexibility in noise reduction. Some converters are also excellent at extracting detail (see comparisons on DPReview for your particular camera for a good example).

Some people don't like needing to do the extra work on a RAW and would rather use the JPEG out of their camera. It's a choice you have to make.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineDeltaAVL From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1893 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2984 times:



Quoting Dvincent (Reply 15):
Some people don't like needing to do the extra work on a RAW and would rather use the JPEG out of their camera. It's a choice you have to make.

Okay, I guess I'm just gonna have to play around a little more and try to figure out which one's the best for me. The post-processing really wasn't all that labor-intensive, so I might just give RAW a go.



"We break, We bend, With hand in hand, When hope is gone, Just hang on." -Guster
User currently offlineLijk604 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 30 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2975 times:

A wise man once said to me, the only reason to shoot JPEG is when your memory cards are almost full.
I have seen a marketable difference in quality in my RAW conversions, vs. my JPEG captures.


User currently offlineJetmatt777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2850 posts, RR: 33
Reply 18, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2962 times:

At school events I shoot RAW and JPEG L. The fact is, these pics go into the yearbook. I need the extra control during post-processing, if the lighting changes dramatically and I don't have time to change the exposure I have to snap away and hope I get a good pic, if the colors/brightness is poor, I can brighten the RAW up to a decent exposure, then convert to jpeg and sharpen in PS. I also shoot RAW + JPEG at the airport, for basically the same reasons. Exposure may change or white balance may change too rapidly to change the exposure on the camera. For example if a cloud gets in the way the exact moment you hit the shutter release button, it's helpful to be able to change the wb in post-processing.

I'm getting to where I shoot RAW 90% of the time. For un-important stuff I just shoot JPEG.

-Matt



No info
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2956 times:



Quoting Sulman (Reply 12):
The exposure evangelists

Priceless!

Quoting Dvincent (Reply 15):
I don't think it's as simple as boiling it down to "Don't bother with RAW because you need to get it right in the camera" because you still need to get your exposure right with RAWs in the first place. Yes, you get more latitude to work with, but the thing about shooting JPEGs is that you've basically committed yourself to the exposure at the time, letting the camera make decisions for you. I prefer having more control. That's all it is really - a preference.

Well said, people think you can just blow out pics and use ACR to make them look like spot on and I don't find that to be the case at all. You still need a good capture.

Quoting Lijk604 (Reply 17):
A wise man once said to me, the only reason to shoot JPEG is when your memory cards are almost full.

Omg John I laughed so hard I almost spit my food all over my laptop screen when I read this. Well shooting jpeg does have it's pros!  Big grin


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
A Few Questions About This Photo posted Wed Apr 26 2006 19:23:35 by AIRBUSRIDER
A Few Questions On Miami Dolphins Plane Pic posted Sat Jan 28 2006 21:48:16 by Edoca
Who Here Is Shooting RAW / NEF posted Thu Jan 5 2006 13:43:10 by LH526
Shooting RAW posted Tue Feb 1 2005 09:37:43 by JumboJim747
10D Users - A Few Questions. posted Mon Jan 3 2005 19:39:15 by Jkw777
A Few Questions About Aviation Photography posted Thu Dec 30 2004 02:49:16 by COAMiG29
A Few Questions Regarding SXM! posted Sun Jul 18 2004 16:13:26 by Jkw777
D70 Users, A Few Questions. posted Fri Apr 23 2004 17:52:40 by Cancidas
A Few Questions Re: Cameras posted Sun Jun 9 2002 10:56:30 by Skyguy11
Few Questions Regarding To Settings For Film posted Sat Apr 7 2001 23:46:23 by BO__einG