Shoot small raw?
Jan 17, 2018 09:34:13 #
If you know you are shooting for the web only, is it better to set the camera to small or set to large and downsize later in post?
--
--
Jan 17, 2018 09:36:44 #
Jan 17, 2018 09:37:59 #
Bill_de wrote:
If you know you are shooting for the web only, is it better to set the camera to small or set to large and downsize later in post?
--
--
Personally I would set it to large and downsize afterwards. Why? What if you took a priceless capture? You would want as much detail as possible, if that was the case.
Harold
Jan 17, 2018 09:42:46 #
sRAW, or small raw format is available on some cameras but not all.
I've never tried it out, but supposedly it's just downsampled from a raw file. You can't just pick and choose bits out of the raw data because of the Bayer filter, so the image is demosaiced before downsampling. I would expect that you lose data when you do all that, so I have never seen the utility of sRAW (which is probably one reason I've never tried it). The other reason I've never tried it is that I have no problem with storage of raw files and I enjoy preserving the original resolution of the image.
I've never tried it out, but supposedly it's just downsampled from a raw file. You can't just pick and choose bits out of the raw data because of the Bayer filter, so the image is demosaiced before downsampling. I would expect that you lose data when you do all that, so I have never seen the utility of sRAW (which is probably one reason I've never tried it). The other reason I've never tried it is that I have no problem with storage of raw files and I enjoy preserving the original resolution of the image.
Jan 17, 2018 10:47:53 #
Feiertag wrote:
Personally I would set it to large and downsize afterwards. Why? What if you took a priceless capture? You would want as much detail as possible, if that was the case.
Harold
Harold
Jan 17, 2018 10:48:16 #
bsprague wrote:
My cameras don't do that. File sizes are for JPEGS, not RAWs.
Why reply if your camera doesn't do that.
Jan 17, 2018 10:53:14 #
Bill_de wrote:
If you know you are shooting for the web only, is it better to set the camera to small or set to large and downsize later in post?
--
--
If you want the best start-point for all possible long-term uses of any given image, capture in the largest (full) RAW format and adjust the image size in Post.
Jan 17, 2018 11:07:56 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
Why reply if your camera doesn't do that.
Why reply if your camera doesn't do that.
Forgive me! Did I step on your toes? I replied to suggest that the choice of a small RAW was not possible. That appears wrong. It is too late to delete my suggestion. I will work harder to keep out of discussions where I have less that fully confirmed expert status.
Jan 17, 2018 11:36:55 #
bsprague wrote:
Forgive me! Did I step on your toes? I replied to suggest that the choice of a small RAW was not possible. That appears wrong. It is too late to delete my suggestion. I will work harder to keep out of discussions where I have less that fully confirmed expert status.
Any way small RAW or small JPEG why shoot small? Memory card is cheap. Unless you want to shoot very fast and tend to run out of buffer I see no reason to use anything less than maximum size. You can always resize later for the web.
Jan 17, 2018 15:21:41 #
If you like to shoot machine gun style as many sports and wildlife photographers do your memory will fill up and slow you down in Large. - dave
Jan 17, 2018 16:45:01 #
Bill_de wrote:
Its easier on your buffer and your memory cards won't fill up quite as fast, when shooting with smaller raw files, but it is a thing of preference. At a later point you may decide you really like one image and would like to print it, that's when shooting large raw files will have an advantage. You can always downsize later!If you know you are shooting for the web only, is it better to set the camera to small or set to large and downsize later in post?
--
--
Jan 17, 2018 16:48:04 #
I am new to digital since I don't even have my first digital camera yet but in researching for a potential purchase I found that most cameras allow for uncompressed and compressed RAW files so aren't the compressed ones smaller?
Jan 17, 2018 17:01:35 #
DTran wrote:
I am new to digital since I don't even have my first digital camera yet but in researching for a potential purchase I found that most cameras allow for uncompressed and compressed RAW files so aren't the compressed ones smaller?
They are stored with compression to save card and drive space, but with all the available pixels. What I am referring to is the camera's ability to actually provide an image with few pixels.
What I was trying to get at but didn't ask properly was the quality of the final image. Would it make a difference if I shot full size and reduced it on the computer after editing, as opposed to choosing a smaller size in the camera and then editing on the computer?
---
Jan 17, 2018 17:06:41 #
What happens if you take that once in a lifetime shot, and want to blow it up poster size? Better to have a large file, and downsize, than to have to try to uprez it.
Jan 17, 2018 17:12:26 #
bkyser wrote:
What happens if you take that once in a lifetime shot, ...
I'd get so excited I'd die of a heart attack.
--
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.