Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Check out Landscape Photography section of our forum.
Main Photography Discussion
Do you shoot in the raw?
Page 1 of 12 next> last>>
Oct 10, 2013 15:25:19   #
Glen H Loc: Bolton Ontario
 
I'm contemplating shooting pictures in raw, instead of JPG.
What are your thoughts on this? Does it produce a better picture? I guess if it is to be posted on line it needs to be converted to a different format anyways!?!?!?
I'm mostly shooting macro of insects and plants.

I have Photoshop CS6 Extended but don't have Light Room


Glen

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:33:16   #
speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho
 
I have never shot a jpeg, but tried to work on one in pp, and did not like it. A jpeg is basically a raw image that the camera processed into a jpeg - without any input from you. If you shoot in raw, you do this processing the way you like it fit, so, yes I think it gives you a better quality, because it will be the way YOU want it to be.

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:37:47   #
jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY
 
Glen H wrote:
I'm contemplating shooting pictures in raw, instead of JPG.
What are your thoughts on this? Does it produce a better picture? I guess if it is to be posted on line it needs to be converted to a different format anyways!?!?!?
I'm mostly shooting macro of insects and plants.

I have Photoshop CS6 Extended but don't have Light Room


Glen

I prefer both, raw+JPG. That way I have a shot I can see and use right away, and I also have the same shot that can take a lot more processing.

Images shot is raw are larger because they have more information, so they can yield better results. A poorly exposed raw image can often be saved, while the same can't be said of JPG.

Reply
Check out Infrared Photography section of our forum.
Oct 10, 2013 15:44:21   #
MT Shooter Loc: Montana
 
I have never shot in "the raw", I doubt my neighbors would appreciate it too much. ;-)

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:48:27   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
Glen H wrote:
I'm contemplating shooting pictures in raw, instead of JPG.
What are your thoughts on this? Does it produce a better picture? I guess if it is to be posted on line it needs to be converted to a different format anyways!?!?!?
I'm mostly shooting macro of insects and plants.

I have Photoshop CS6 Extended but don't have Light Room


Glen


IMHO RAW is the only way to photograph. You can do so much more in ACR and PS6x. Don't worry about not having LR. You have more than enough with what you currently use.

Though it was an amateurish mistake, I was just not accustomed to all the settings when I made this faux pas. Hell, I'd only had the camera about a month. However, it is a good example that convinced me that the extra time, and bit of a learning curve it takes, gets much better results in the long run.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-133857-1.html

If I'd have used jpg mode, the fist image would have been the only image.

--Bob

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:49:00   #
Wellhiem Loc: Sunny England.
 
I would never go back to JPG. AS has already been said, why let the software in your camera decide what your photo should look like? It would be like in the days of film, taking all that time to get it just right and then letting your local Super Snaps do the developing and printing.

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:50:07   #
GWR100 Loc: England
 
Hi Glen. Think of RAW as a negative which is full of all the info the camera captures, and jpeg is a picture that the electronics thinks is the best use of the info the camera has captured to make a nice picture. With jpeg you have lost control of what you actually took and handed the interoperation to the Camera. Why not try shooting Raw & jpeg for a while until you get used to it.

Geoff

Glen H wrote:
I'm contemplating shooting pictures in raw, instead of JPG.
What are your thoughts on this? Does it produce a better picture? I guess if it is to be posted on line it needs to be converted to a different format anyways!?!?!?
I'm mostly shooting macro of insects and plants.

I have Photoshop CS6 Extended but don't have Light Room


Glen

Reply
Check out Professional and Advanced Portraiture section of our forum.
Oct 10, 2013 15:50:09   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
MT Shooter wrote:
I have never shot in "the raw", I doubt my neighbors would appreciate it too much. ;-)


:thumbup:

I'm not one even of your neighbors and I truly appreciate that you don't. 8-)

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:55:05   #
juicesqueezer Loc: Okeechobee, Florida
 
I shot in the RAW once, just once!

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:55:05   #
SharpShooter Loc: NorCal
 
Only in the summer, as are most of my subjects. Fair is fair.
SS

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:55:20   #
Glen H Loc: Bolton Ontario
 
rmalarz wrote:
IMHO RAW is the only way to photograph. You can do so much more in ACR and PS6x. Don't worry about not having LR. You have more than enough with what you currently use.

Though it was an amateurish mistake, I was just not accustomed to all the settings when I made this faux pas. Hell, I'd only had the camera about a month. However, it is a good example that convinced me that the extra time, and bit of a learning curve it takes, gets much better results in the long run.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-133857-1.html

If I'd have used jpg mode, the fist image would have been the only image.

--Bob
IMHO RAW is the only way to photograph. You can do... (show quote)


WOW the saying really is true!!! "A picture says a thousand word". After seeing the two photos, I get your point! Thanks for sharing.:thumbup:

Glen

Reply
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Oct 10, 2013 15:55:40   #
MagicMark
 
Glen H wrote:
I'm contemplating shooting pictures in raw, instead of JPG.
What are your thoughts on this? Does it produce a better picture? I guess if it is to be posted on line it needs to be converted to a different format anyways!?!?!?
I'm mostly shooting macro of insects and plants.

I have Photoshop CS6 Extended but don't have Light Room


Glen


Glen,
I'm different from most folks in that I always shoot both raw and jpeg. My theory is, if one picture needs correcting, I have a raw to fall back on. The jpeg is for when I don't really have the time to edit the raw file. Plus, with both, I have covered myself from one image being a corrupted file and it was the best shot.

Hope this helps.

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:56:30   #
MagicMark
 
MagicMark wrote:
Glen,
I'm different from most folks in that I always shoot both raw and jpeg. My theory is, if one picture needs correcting, I have a raw to fall back on. The jpeg is for when I don't really have the time to edit the raw file. Plus, with both, I have covered myself from one image being a corrupted file and it was the best shot. So, that way I have two copies.

Hope this helps.

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:57:17   #
Glen H Loc: Bolton Ontario
 
GWR100 wrote:
Hi Glen. Think of RAW as a negative which is full of all the info the camera captures, and jpeg is a picture that the electronics thinks is the best use of the info the camera has captured to make a nice picture. With jpeg you have lost control of what you actually took and handed the interoperation to the Camera. Why not try shooting Raw & jpeg for a while until you get used to it.

Geoff


OK makes sense.

Glen

Reply
Oct 10, 2013 15:57:26   #
MagicMark
 
I have no idea HOW I double posted but I'm sure it was me who did it. Sorry.

Reply
Page 1 of 12 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out True Macro-Photography Forum section of our forum.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.