Playing with fire: What I mean by this is that I shot these hand held at 1/30 sec. with a 2 & 1/2 year old as my subject. In addition, these were shot using only the light from an east...

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

What I mean by this is that I shot these hand held at 1/30 sec. with a 2 & 1/2 year old as my subject. In addition, these were shot using only the light from an east facing window in Jpeg. What??? Jpeg? So what? Give me one good reason why I must shoot in raw; and don't give me any of that crap about how one has more latitude in post with the adjustments. I already know this.

Big deal. If one sets up the camera properly in the first place, any adjustment that one feels is necessary can be accomplished easily whether shot in Jpeg or raw. These photos are as shot with the exception of cropping. I was actually experimenting with the focus metering. I would say that about 100% of the time I use spot metering, but I just wanted to test other modes (in this case, center weighted metering) with my newest camera. This came out about as I expected. What I do like about my camera is that it has a feature called flexible spot metering. In other words, if I am in that mode, I can focus on one eye and even if the subject is slightly turned, the other eye will be in focus also if I chose to do so.

Don't get me wrong. I am not knocking raw since I shoot in raw at home about 90% of the time. At work, I am required by law to shoot in Jpeg. What I do not like are these know-it-alls who insist that the only way to shoot a quality photos, it has to be done with the camera set to raw. Over course nothing can be further from the truth. What makes me cringe even worse is that these people are telling those new to the hobby that this is the only way to go.

When I first started out, I had some clown try to tell me the same thing. I was having a hard enough time just trying how the damn thing worked and what all the functions were for. What the hell did I know about raw vs. Jpeg? I knew, and I would tell other newbies the same thing; learn how to set up the camera and take a "good" photo before worrying about the other stuff that has to do with post processing. In my opinion, learn how to use the camera instinctively first. Then as one progresses with their expertise, it is time to take advantage of the raw feature setting if the camera has that feature.

With all of this being said, I know that these examples are not the greatest at many levels, but with just a little post processing, these can be made much better such as sharpening, adjusting the highlights, removing blemishes (in this case dirty sensor spots), etc. As I said, these are Jpegs to begin with, but it is also easy to see that a whole lot of pp isn't going to be needed anyway. The main thing with these photos is that it is also obvious that they should have been taken with a much faster shutter speed. Whether or not these were shot in raw or Jpeg, pp can only take the focus issue only so far.

My setting were as follows: F6.3, @1/30sec. ISO 800.

Oh, and I will readily admit my biggest problem still with my portraiture is the proper use of lighting. Even at that, it doesn't matter if it is shot in Jpeg or raw.

(Download)

jim quist Loc: Missouri

If you have the color balance and exposure set correctly you don't need raw. If you have the color balance wrong you better hope you shot in raw. OMG, what did ever do before we knew about raw anyway? Shot in jpeg for newspapers, magazines, weddings, etc.

jim quist Loc: Missouri

If you have the color balance and exposure set correctly you don't need raw. If you have the color balance wrong you better hope you shot in raw. OMG, what did ever do before we knew about raw anyway? Shot in jpeg for newspapers, magazines, weddings, collegiate sports, photo contests etc.

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

jim quist wrote:

If you have the color balance and exposure set correctly you don't need raw. If you have the color balance wrong you better hope you shot in raw. OMG, what did ever do before we knew about raw anyway? Shot in jpeg for newspapers, magazines, weddings, etc.

It is funny about WB also. If it is bad enough even when shot in raw, it aint going to get fixed all the way either.

Swamp-Cork Loc: Lanexa, Virginia

Precious images, Tom!

angler Loc: StHelens England

Lovely shots Tom she's a pretty young lady.

Sylvias Loc: North Yorkshire England

An adorable princess Tom, whatever the settings!

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

tainkc wrote:

What I mean by this is that I shot these hand held at 1/30 sec. with a 2 & 1/2 year old as my subject. In addition, these were shot using only the light from an east facing window in Jpeg. What??? Jpeg? So what? Give me one good reason why I must shoot in raw; and don't give me any of that crap about how one has more latitude in post with the adjustments. I already know this.

Big deal. If one sets up the camera properly in the first place, any adjustment that one feels is necessary can be accomplished easily whether shot in Jpeg or raw. These photos are as shot with the exception of cropping. I was actually experimenting with the focus metering. I would say that about 100% of the time I use spot metering, but I just wanted to test other modes (in this case, center weighted metering) with my newest camera. This came out about as I expected. What I do like about my camera is that it has a feature called flexible spot metering. In other words, if I am in that mode, I can focus on one eye and even if the subject is slightly turned, the other eye will be in focus also if I chose to do so.

Don't get me wrong. I am not knocking raw since I shoot in raw at home about 90% of the time. At work, I am required by law to shoot in Jpeg. What I do not like are these know-it-alls who insist that the only way to shoot a quality photos, it has to be done with the camera set to raw. Over course nothing can be further from the truth. What makes me cringe even worse is that these people are telling those new to the hobby that this is the only way to go.

When I first started out, I had some clown try to tell me the same thing. I was having a hard enough time just trying how the damn thing worked and what all the functions were for. What the hell did I know about raw vs. Jpeg? I knew, and I would tell other newbies the same thing; learn how to set up the camera and take a "good" photo before worrying about the other stuff that has to do with post processing. In my opinion, learn how to use the camera instinctively first. Then as one progresses with their expertise, it is time to take advantage of the raw feature setting if the camera has that feature.

With all of this being said, I know that these examples are not the greatest at many levels, but with just a little post processing, these can be made much better such as sharpening, adjusting the highlights, removing blemishes (in this case dirty sensor spots), etc. As I said, these are Jpegs to begin with, but it is also easy to see that a whole lot of pp isn't going to be needed anyway. The main thing with these photos is that it is also obvious that they should have been taken with a much faster shutter speed. Whether or not these were shot in raw or Jpeg, pp can only take the focus issue only so far.

My setting were as follows: F6.3, @1/30sec. ISO 800.

Oh, and I will readily admit my biggest problem still with my portraiture is the proper use of lighting. Even at that, it doesn't matter if it is shot in Jpeg or raw.

What I mean by this is that I shot these hand held... (show quote)

Shooting raw or jpeg is a thing of preference, and you're right, a good jpeg is just as satisfying and one does not need to shoot in raw, but if shooting commercial, you'll likely end up having to make several versions of one image (for clients, different print set-up's, etc.) and that would most likely destroy your file at the end, if the base image is a jpeg, while a raw file would survive without a hitch. So the argument about more latitude in post is- and remains a solid argument in favor of shooting in raw!

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

Swamp-Cork wrote:

Precious images, Tom!

Thank you, Corky.

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

angler wrote:

Lovely shots Tom she's a pretty young lady.

Thank you, Jimmy. All kids are cute. No, wait, I take that back. I saw a monkey boy once.

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

Sylvias wrote:

An adorable princess Tom, whatever the settings!

Thank you so much, Sylvia! Unfortunately, her personality is just like her mom's. Lol.

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

speters wrote:

Shooting raw or jpeg is a thing of preference, and... (show quote)

Oh, yeah, I know this. Hopefully by now, you know not to take me too seriously. I say a lot of things tongue-in-cheek on with a little twist as I drive the knife in.

Annie-Get-Your-Gun Loc: Byron Center, Mi

tainkc wrote:

What I mean by this is that I shot these hand held at 1/30 sec. with a 2 & 1/2 year old as my subject. In addition, these were shot using only the light from an east facing window in Jpeg. What??? Jpeg? So what? Give me one good reason why I must shoot in raw; and don't give me any of that crap about how one has more latitude in post with the adjustments. I already know this.

Big deal. If one sets up the camera properly in the first place, any adjustment that one feels is necessary can be accomplished easily whether shot in Jpeg or raw. These photos are as shot with the exception of cropping. I was actually experimenting with the focus metering. I would say that about 100% of the time I use spot metering, but I just wanted to test other modes (in this case, center weighted metering) with my newest camera. This came out about as I expected. What I do like about my camera is that it has a feature called flexible spot metering. In other words, if I am in that mode, I can focus on one eye and even if the subject is slightly turned, the other eye will be in focus also if I chose to do so.

Don't get me wrong. I am not knocking raw since I shoot in raw at home about 90% of the time. At work, I am required by law to shoot in Jpeg. What I do not like are these know-it-alls who insist that the only way to shoot a quality photos, it has to be done with the camera set to raw. Over course nothing can be further from the truth. What makes me cringe even worse is that these people are telling those new to the hobby that this is the only way to go.

When I first started out, I had some clown try to tell me the same thing. I was having a hard enough time just trying how the damn thing worked and what all the functions were for. What the hell did I know about raw vs. Jpeg? I knew, and I would tell other newbies the same thing; learn how to set up the camera and take a "good" photo before worrying about the other stuff that has to do with post processing. In my opinion, learn how to use the camera instinctively first. Then as one progresses with their expertise, it is time to take advantage of the raw feature setting if the camera has that feature.

With all of this being said, I know that these examples are not the greatest at many levels, but with just a little post processing, these can be made much better such as sharpening, adjusting the highlights, removing blemishes (in this case dirty sensor spots), etc. As I said, these are Jpegs to begin with, but it is also easy to see that a whole lot of pp isn't going to be needed anyway. The main thing with these photos is that it is also obvious that they should have been taken with a much faster shutter speed. Whether or not these were shot in raw or Jpeg, pp can only take the focus issue only so far.

My setting were as follows: F6.3, @1/30sec. ISO 800.

Oh, and I will readily admit my biggest problem still with my portraiture is the proper use of lighting. Even at that, it doesn't matter if it is shot in Jpeg or raw.

What I mean by this is that I shot these hand held... (show quote)

After wading through the interesting technical comments, I was hoping I'd be rewarded with a treasure, tainkc, and I was. This beautiful little girl steals my heart. She is precious! May I know this little angel's name?

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

Annie-Get-Your-Gun wrote:

After wading through the interesting technical com... (show quote)

Thank you very much! Her name Is Avery. She will be 3 in May.

(Download)

Annie-Get-Your-Gun Loc: Byron Center, Mi

tainkc wrote:

Thank you very much! Her name Is Avery. She will be 3 in May.

Thank you. I love Avery's blue eyes and cute smile.