Author Topic: raw....v's......jpeg  (Read 5853 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 5DandMe

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
raw....v's......jpeg
« on: April 02, 2007, 12:36:51 PM »
i have never taken any shot in raw and have never looked into the raw side of digital photography, what can i achieve in raw that i dont get with jpeg. I'm heading away for the easter break (happy easter by the way) and plan on shooting in raw, so when i get back i will hopefully have some hints/tips from you guys/girls on here and can start to put them into practice.

hints/tips/ideas are welcome....so is help

cheers
Brett
If I pushed a copy of myself off a cliff because he was swearing could I be charged with making an obscene clone fall?

Offline winjeel

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 5413
  • Gender: Male
  • Gelight
    • japanesephotos
    • JapanesePhotos
    • JapanesePhotos.Asia
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2007, 02:48:09 PM »
For regular family shots, I don't think you need to shoot in RAW. I always use raw, but if it's just for fun, family, and forums, I use the jpeg. For high-end stuff, selling, printing, and pride, I do all the tweaking in RAW. With RAW, you can salvage or adjust dark pictures, but adjusting the Exposure Compensation, using the Luminesence to reduce noise (to a degree), lighten the shadows and darken highlights and things. For all this, I use the RAW processor in Photoshop.
JapanesePhotos.Asia; Some basic photographic how to's.
Sony the200, Minolta 28mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 70-300mm Gregarious, 100mm 2.8 macro.

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2007, 03:34:42 PM »
Take a look at the examples that DXO give:

http://www.dxo.com/intl/photo/dxo_optics_pro

http://www.dxo.com/intl/photo/dxo_optics_pro/overview/sophisticated_lighting

RAW basically allows more control over the post processing, since it gives the software more "data" to work with.  CF memory is so cheap nowadays I see no reason to shoot "jpegs" anymore.  You can always convert from RAW to jpegs later, but never from jpegs to RAW.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2007, 03:39:23 PM by springtide »
NEX-7

flickr

Offline ISO3200

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 1551
  • Gender: Male
  • Shaken, not blurred...
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2007, 04:19:00 PM »
On my camera, changing image quality only takes a button press, so I switch between jpeg fine, basic and raw all the time. Use whatever you feel comfortable with and don't feel pressured into raw. Use it for some critical shots and see if you can get something more from it. Compare an identicle jpeg and a raw shot and see if the difference is significant enough for you. That's my advice.
SB-400, 28-200/3.5-5.6 AF G, 50/1.8 AF D, 60/2.8 AF D Micro-Nikkor, 105/2.8 AF-S VR G Micro-Nikkor, 70-180/4.5-5.6 AF D Micro-Nikkor, 200/4 AF D Micro-Nikkor, 70-300/4.5-5.6 AF-S VR G, Nikon PB-6... Yes I quite like macro.

Offline gazraa

  • Site Founder
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • ******
  • Posts: 3659
  • Gender: Male
  • Real Name: Garry
    • gazraa
    • www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=12149823
    • gazraa
    • Photography Basics
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2007, 05:28:21 PM »
raw gives you a lot more flexibility in post processing. You can bring back detail with better results, alter exposure, white balance, colour temperature, shadows, highlights etc etc

jpegs will be compressed and that is the big difference, so there will always be a slight loss of quality when using jpeg instead of raw.

It does mean even more time in front of the computer though and of course more space used up on your memory cards reducing the amount of pictures you can take.
Street Photographer | Portfolio | Photography Basics Fujifilm X-Pro2 | Fujifilm X-Pro1

Offline Rob aka [minolta mad]

  • Administrator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • ******
  • Posts: 10061
  • Gender: Male
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1260183143#!/profile.php?id=1494244129
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/robkendall/
    • http://www.redbubble.com/people/minoltamad
    • Westcountry Photographic
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2007, 09:49:16 PM »
I always shoot RAW+small jpeg,
then have the best of both worlds, have the raw there for those memorable shots and the small jpegs if its say a quick family pic, then just delete the ones you dont want.

Also have to agree with what everyone else has already said,

rob

Offline fother

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 7846
  • Gender: Male
  • Michael
    • MichaelFoth
    • au.linkedin.com/in/fother
    • fother
    • MichaelFoth
    • my index site
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #6 on: April 03, 2007, 01:20:22 AM »

I do the same as Rob, shoot in dual mode - pics that come out the way I want from the camera I use the JPG, but if there's a problem (underexposure or whatever), the corrections you can perform in RAW are much more flexible than with JPG...

but it's really down to what works for each person :)

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #7 on: April 03, 2007, 11:06:43 PM »
I always shoot RAW+small jpeg,
then have the best of both worlds, have the raw there for those memorable shots and the small jpegs if its say a quick family pic, then just delete the ones you dont want.

Also have to agree with what everyone else has already said,

rob

I actually shoot RAW+large JPEG since I bought a second CF 2GB card for about £30.  Now that Picasa2 allows the browsing of RAW, I've been wondering why I'm bothering to keep jpegs?

I don't take enough good photos to be able to decide when to shoot RAW and when to shoot JPEG.  And usually need the option to "post process" anything that comes out "reasonable" :) 
« Last Edit: April 04, 2007, 12:13:37 PM by springtide »
NEX-7

flickr

Offline spooky

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2007, 01:10:26 PM »
Just spotted this thread. One of the main reasons for going Raw is that each time you edit and save a JPEG the image quality is degraded, this doesn't happen when editing RAW files.

Make as many changes in a RAW processor then save as JPEG to save space.

Offline fother

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 7846
  • Gender: Male
  • Michael
    • MichaelFoth
    • au.linkedin.com/in/fother
    • fother
    • MichaelFoth
    • my index site
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #9 on: April 14, 2007, 10:39:13 AM »

I've recently changed tack - had been shooting RAW+JPG  -- raw for stuff that needs post prod., JPG for stuff that's fine as is.

As of just before easter I switched to RAW mode - Lightroom is so fast & gets such good results I have no further need of JPGs... also means more shots per card

Yesterday I couldn't go past a very cheap 4GB Extreme III CF card, which will take (estimated) 433 RAW shots!

Offline spooky

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #10 on: April 14, 2007, 07:58:51 PM »
I assume theres no reason why a 4gb wouldn't work in an A100 ?

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #11 on: April 14, 2007, 09:42:35 PM »

I've recently changed tack - had been shooting RAW+JPG  -- raw for stuff that needs post prod., JPG for stuff that's fine as is.

As of just before easter I switched to RAW mode - Lightroom is so fast & gets such good results I have no further need of JPGs... also means more shots per card

Yesterday I couldn't go past a very cheap 4GB Extreme III CF card, which will take (estimated) 433 RAW shots!

That's really interesting. I've been thinking the same!

I remember something about not being able to "zoom" on the camera if you shoot RAW only.  Mind you, I can't remember the last time I did that!

OK, so for archive, RAW or Adobe Digital Negative or both?

I'm pretty sold on DXO which supports the output of as many formats - as part of the batch processing, so this adds no additional work, storing the data , just a matter of trying to work out in 20 years time - will I be able to "read" these file types?

BTW, if you haven't tried DxO Optics Pro v4 -  give it a whirl.  I'd be really interested on this compares to Lightroom or something else.  I must admit, I really like DXO.  It's also won many awards ( http://www.dxo.com/intl/photo/news/press_awards ) but most people on this forum (and others) doesn't seem to use it.  So I'm wondering why?  Better products on the market or have people not discovered DXO?
NEX-7

flickr

Offline fother

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 7846
  • Gender: Male
  • Michael
    • MichaelFoth
    • au.linkedin.com/in/fother
    • fother
    • MichaelFoth
    • my index site
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #12 on: April 15, 2007, 12:37:20 AM »
Spooky - no reason I know of ... if it didnt work, any half decent store would take it back anyway...


Archiving - Raw mostly, and those I post prod I usually also convert to TIFF (and JPGs for sharing with others, posting here / on my sites, etc).

I've toyed with Adobe's Digital Negatives, but I'm not fully sold one the value of converting one RAW format to another... there are some good arguments in terms of possible future compatibility, but I'll cross that bridge when it comes - batch conversion isn't such a hard thing to do...

Offline ecniv

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 674
  • Gender: Male
  • Amateur
Re: raw....v's......jpeg
« Reply #13 on: May 02, 2007, 08:22:48 AM »
I shoot on the 5D in raw n large jpeg (1024x768 I think it is).
1) One reason is that you can see the pics in windoze and grab the corresponding raw without waiting too long for them to process.
2) Second is that I have an Archos hd 80gb player and it displays pics - but not raws. So I can dump pics on there as a portable storage device and see them/display them to people or on a tv.

Only have a 1gb card tho so I get approx 80 shots before an offload is required.

Dynax 5D
Sigma 24mm 2.8, Tamron 28-300mm f3.5-6.3 Minolta AF XR Di LD Macro Lens
Flickr Pages
D300 + 18-200 AF-S DX G ED VR f3.5/5.6