Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Tue Sep 23, 2014 7:05 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: RAW for everything?
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 12:24 pm 
Hey, I have a question... sould i shoot RAW all the time... would it have better detail then shooting JPEG? whats the differens?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 12:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 6009
Location: The Netherlands
Congrats, you must be the 1000th person to ask this question. I sadly do not have a spare care lying around, but if I did, you would have won it. :D

Please, search around a bit, this question has been answered many times :)

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 5:38 pm 
Have a read of Ken Rockwell's thoughts on the issue. I personally agree with him. If you have to ask, you're probably better off shooting in JPEG. For fun snaps and holidays, I shoot in JPEG because RAW adds very little to me in those situations. On the other hand if I'm covering a wedding or any other paid work then I shoot RAW for the safety net that brings. Most of the time, I just stick the RAW through the converter at the default settings anyway ...


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 6:53 pm 
Hi R. Dixon,

If you have an image where the dynamic range is wider than what the JPEG format can support, then there is the potential for loss. JPEG is a compression algorithm - well several of them - applied to image-information to save on file-sizes.

Not all pictures necessarily exceeds the JPEG format and for many of those who do, it;s not visible to the naked eye and certainly not even visible on a computer monitor.

RAW files gives you somewhat more leeway to push post-processing further without getting an overprocessed look. For example: shadow detail in a high-contrast exposure can be lightened and more detail be pulled out of the shadows than a JPEG - most of the time. But it's not exactly HDR-technique either, so don't expect miracles.

Finally, gradations can sometimes be handled more elegantly with a RAW file. It depends a lot on what else is in the picture - JPEG may cover it, but it may not.

Ultimately you should make this decision for yourself. My suggestion is that for everyday shooting just stick with JPEG - good pictures are good pictures and they look fabulous in 18X12 inch prints. Don't worry - you do not need to have that feeling when you have taken a great shot that you really like - but in JPEG - that "OH DRATS! now it's gonna suck on a big print because I didn't use RAW".

Experiement. If you go out in the "golden hours" of the day with your tripod and shoot some killer sunsets, foliage, mountain and water shots - try it with RAW. Just a few to begin with. Then process them with RAW software and see if there is a significant difference to your eyes - but don't expect a "HEUREKA" experience looking at your monitor (unless you got some 30 inch Lacie OLED beast for $5.000 dollars..lol). And see where it gets you.

RAW files are large and RAW processing is an extra step in the work flow.

Not that it has any bearing on what's right for you, but I only shoot JPEG.

Cheers :-)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 3:14 am 
R. Dixon,
Ditto what LahLah said with the fact that I would add this RAW files aren't exactly picture files per se. RAW files are actually more data files than they are image files. The way that they work is your camera takes the data from the sensor and puts it into a data file that needs processed by RAW software. I myself shoot everything in RAW just because I am actually going back to school for Photography and other than my basic entry-level courses my professors have all required that us students shoot in RAW so it has just basically become like second-nature to me anymore.
Gunner out


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:12 pm 
Hi,

I am an amateur. But, from what I know, shooting RAW has much more potential in DSLRs than compact cameras. In DSLRs, you can get upto +/-2EV compensation by shooting in RAW versus JPEG. RAWs help a lot in white balance and post-processing. However, just converting RAWs to JPEGs would give little advantage of shooting RAW. If you shoot RAW and intent to exploit its advantages, you need to post-process. Whether to shoot JPEG or RAW would depend on how much time you are willing to give each image on the computer.

Hope this helps. My apologies if you knew any/all of this.
Jinay.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 11:28 am 
Quote:
Hey, I have a question... sould i shoot RAW all the time... would it have better detail then shooting JPEG? whats the differens?


Yes.
Sort of.
Try here : http://tinyurl.com/2egdycz

No need to thank me.

Matt


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 1:49 pm 
I have a army-green T-shirt with "I only shoot RAW" written on it. :D (was a gift)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 3:52 pm
Posts: 2176
Location: The Netherlands
Yaay, I want that T-shirt too!
Since I saw how beautiful RAW is, I only use it.
I only use JPEG for sports etc, since I cant shoot continuously RAW

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 9:06 am
Posts: 386
Location: Manchester (UK)
With memory cards so cheap shoot RAW + JPEG. After uploading to the computer you are happy with the jpegs then delete the raws. If you for instance have a White balance issue you can create a recipe in your raw converter to fix it and then apply it to all the images. It's also easy to convert to black and white from raw.

Just a thought

mirageII

_________________
Canon EOS 400D, EF-S 18-55mm, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 50mm f/1.8 MK I, EF-S 10-22mm, EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM, EF 35mm f/2 IS, EF 85mm f/1.8
Canon 430EX II, Manfrotto 055CXPRO3, Arca Swiss P0
Panasonic GX1, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Olympus 45mm f/1.8
Canon EOS 30/33 and Pentax MX/ME Super

MY FLICKR!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 6009
Location: The Netherlands
I'm not sure if this has been said before, but if you are happy with the results you get with Jpeg, by all means keep using it.

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group