pkr

I have now begun to save my photos in both raw (ARW) and JPEG format. When I edit the files in Photoshop Elements 15, I don't notice any difference in the quality of the edited pictures. Am I missing something about editing raw files? I use the elements raw editor that pops up when I open the raw file.

Silverman Loc: Michigan

I too need to learn more concerning RAW + JPEG, exactly how to post-process my images, best editing program, etc. How much SDHC memory will I require., 32gb, 64vb, etc. Can I still make prints from the RAW +JPEG format?

jenny Loc: in hiding:)

Depends on what you were saving them as before. You may be a competent reader of a RAW file and pp-er, or you may have
processed your JPEGs above the average that the JPEG group adopted as a reasonable standard. The unfortunate opinion of the
"difference between a JPEG and a RAW",is that of comparing a developed RAW against an unimproved, "SOOC" JPEG which can
be developed further to your liking.

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

I think the main reason I shoot in RAW exclusively is because I really don't worry about how my camera is set as long as I get the exposer reasonably correct. Don't get me wrong I use a gray card and a white card to set my camera but if I change lighting and forget to adjust I can correct it later in post. JPG just doesn't have anywhere near the amount of data in the capture as RAW does and RAW will allow you a lot more latitude in post.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

The difference will "pop" out in how much more detail will be available within the shadows of a raw vs a JPG. A JPG from a camera is processed internally by the camera from a raw file, data is thrown away according to camera settings and the programming built into the camera, a raw file is unprocessed data, all the data from the shot.

Editing a raw file will usually end up with more detail, the ability to recover highlights and shadows that would be unrecoverable or require much much more work in a processed JPG version.

I shoot 100% raw only, maintain and edit my raw images in Lightroom and am able to create as many JPG's or Tiff's as needed whenever needed, so I waste no space saving JPG's. If I need a JPG out of the camera for a shoot - have had that happen while shooting an event, easy enough for the camera to create a single JPG for use.

What you will find is that for almost every camera setting, they pertain to a JPG conversion only, for example, the white balance, noise reduction, saturation, sharpening, etc - only matter to the image shown on the LCD and when the camera converts the raw data into a JPG.

That is why a raw image requires post processing in your computer to tweak the settings. Everything is editable. And working on raw means that in most cases, you can always revert to the original raw image at any time since the editing software does not write any changes directly to the raw file, like it does a JPG file.

Shooting raw may mean a little more work - time spent in post processing, but the output can be very dramatic.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

Exactly - I never worry about camera settings either - well, not counting ISO, aperture & shutter speed of course ;)

jenny Loc: in hiding:)

* * * * *
You certainly wouldn't want to make a print from a RAW file as it is simply raw, i.e. unprocessed. It contains all sorts
of junk that needs to be discarded, which is what is done for you to produce a JPEG version.
Often the "reason" for not choosing a JPEG is that the mfr. is making the decision for you. But JPEG is more than a processed picture,
it is a group of internationally known expert photographers who set the standard. If you know better, then you must be an expert.

The next common objection to JPEG then is that you will lose IQ (image quality) by improving your JPEG, but it can
actually take quite a lot before that happens. And to claim that it can not be saved from this is ridiculous because
you can make copies of the JPEG original and work on the copies, saving both the original and any # of versions without
ever degrading the original. The last "reason"for using RAW totally unprocessed exposure is that of being able to save a big
mistake such as over-exposure of white or highlights where visible detail is lost, and shooting RAW allows correction better.
However, that insurance against over-exposure is limited since if over-exposing has lost all detail it can not be recovered.
You will need more storage space if you save RAW files, and all that extra space is the junk you eliminated in processing.
You will need to convert to JPEG for most purposes anyway. 99% of the time I see RAW promoted on this forum, it is not
for doing something better but to correct mistakes, claiming everything can be saved with RAW and post processing, and
most of those "reasons" stem from not understanding one's camera, neither exposure nor the settings one can use
for the best image before pressing the shutter button.
Be prepared, however, that in asking the questions you chose, you stepped into a never-ending and very "uncivil" war of words,
opinions, and "reasoning". So look at the top of any page you are on and find the SEARCH option, press the button and find
that this subject has been argued to total exhaustion for anyone who has been here long.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

You do not print raw files, you first edit/convert them and print a converted file, for example, my raw files(DNG format are stored in Lightroom) and if I need to publish an image on Flicker or print it I will output either a JPG or Tiff, depending on what is required.

The raw + JPG setting is not a format, it is two separate files, one the raw data that was normally discarded when you were taking JPG only and the in camera processed JPG from the raw data. Every raw file already contains several JPG images within the raw file, but you need special tools to strip them out.

As for memory cards - I stick to 32 GB cards myself - they will allow me plenty of storage for shooting, are not super expensive and if something happens to a 32 GB card I might only lose 32 GB of images - with a 64 GB card, costs are higher and you can possibly lose 64 GB of images with a failure - I have had a 64 GB card fail on my, luckily AFTER I had transferred the images.

FWIW - I keep 2 32 GB cards in my Nikon D7100, and write images to both so one is primary and one is a backup, just in case.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

My native RAW editor affords more control over some parameters, like color temperature, sharpness, etc., than my JPEG editors.
Remember, what you see in the RAW editor is a display by the editor of the RAW data, not a explicitly a "RAW image". A JPEG image is a conversion of the RAW data. I always shoot RAW+JPEG, so I can view the JPEGs in Windows Explorer and then do any preliminary adjustments in my RAW editor.

louparker Loc: Scottsdale, AZ

As others have stated, the main reasons for shooting RAW is (1) preservation of highlight and shadow detail, which may be lost in a JPEG, and (2) no need to worry about white balance, contrast and brightness settings. So, I shoot RAW only and after post-processing, I then convert the images to JPEGs for some additional tweaking (like correcting perspective, lens distortion, special effects, etc.), sharing, emailing, printing, posting to the web, etc. I then save my finished JPEGs on my computer and save the RAW files externally.

BTW, there have been a ton of previous threads about RAW vs. JPEG in this forum -- I suggest you check those out before starting yet another thread about this topic.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Exactly.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Shooting in RAW, does not to any degree, mean that I don't give serious consideration to my camera settings.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

What you are missing is that Photoshop Elements has very limited 16bit capability, so you are effectively working in the same 8bit color space as JPEG.

"The one eyed man is king in the kingdom of the blind".

"If your only tool is a hammer, then all of your problems look like nails."

These are the mantras of the JPEG evangelists.

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

I'm talking more about white balance not aperture speed or ISO. I shoot manual most of the time and the only thing I will Preset is my ISO, the rest I do without even thinking to much about it except what I'm looking at and I adjust from there.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

In terms of incivility pejorative words such as 'junk' don't position you very well Jenny, especially when predicated upon your substantial ignorance of the facts of the situation.

Is that concise enough for you?