Raw vs JPEG
Aug 26, 2018 18:19:48 #
I realize I might be opening up a can of worms with this post, but, here goes. Understand, I am by no means a professional photographer, at best, am an avid enthusiast. I shoot with a Nikon D5600, and my lens of choice is the Nikkor 70-300mm. I have been a strong believer in shooting in raw, for all of the obvious, stated reasons. This afternoon, I was shooting shots at my hummer feeder, and decided tom shoot in JPEG. I was blown away with the results. I swear, my photos are sharper, JPEG straight out of then camera, than they are shooting raw, and processing them in photoshop. It could be, perhaps, I don't know how to process them in photoshop. but right now, I am thinking, JPEG is the way to go. Here is a photo I took this afternoon, I did crop it, in camera, for better prospective. Comments are welcome.
Aug 26, 2018 18:28:29 #
Aug 26, 2018 18:28:37 #
xt2
Loc: British Columbia, Canada
Nice shot, and I agree that often my jpegs are great, but let's not go down the path again and again please...
Aug 26, 2018 18:29:10 #
Use Nikon software instead of Photoshop you will have the exact same result as the JPEG. Photoshop may not use the camera settings to convert to JPEG so it may look flat, low contrast and not sharpened.
Aug 26, 2018 18:30:05 #
jradose wrote:
I realize I might be opening up a can of worms wit... (show quote)
Nice image. Are they "all" turning out this good, or this an outlier? When you shoot in RAW, there is no modification of the image by the camera. When you shoot JPEG, the camera will apply pre-selected modifications to the image. For instance, your JPEG images can be sharpened, saturated, etc, by the camera via your menu selections.
When everything is right....JPEG works well in most cases. When something is not right....a RAW image will be more easily fixed in PP.
Aug 26, 2018 18:39:28 #
BebuLamar wrote:
Use Nikon software instead of Photoshop you will have the exact same result as the JPEG. Photoshop may not use the camera settings to convert to JPEG so it may look flat, low contrast and not sharpened.
Hmmm, never have used Nikon software, will give it a try. Thanks a bunch for the advice, and thank you especially for NOT saying, "ON NO, NOT AGAIN!!"
Aug 26, 2018 18:43:16 #
You don't need the approval of anyone here; do what works for you!
Aug 26, 2018 18:44:00 #
jradose wrote:
Hmmm, never have used Nikon software, will give it a try. Thanks a bunch for the advice, and thank you especially for NOT saying, "ON NO, NOT AGAIN!!"
I sometimes use Nikon Capture NX-D (and Nikon Transfer 2) both free on the Nikon site. Both do a good job on what I need done.
Aug 26, 2018 18:57:06 #
jradose wrote:
Hmmm, never have used Nikon software, will give it a try. Thanks a bunch for the advice, and thank you especially for NOT saying, "ON NO, NOT AGAIN!!"
with that said and if your goal is to get your RAW the same as JPEG then why shoot RAW? With either the Nikon or Photoshop you can get better result than the JPEG straight out of the camera. With Photoshop you will have to make the adjustments but you have potential for even better result than the Nikon software. The only advantage of the Nikon software is that it applies all same in camera setting to the RAW file initially so you have the same JPEG. You can then try to improve from there.
Aug 26, 2018 18:57:36 #
A lot of people use raw, not because it's inherently sharper or better looking, but because (1) it has a larger range of adjustment available in postprocessing than does a jpg; (2) it's easier to recover from a bad camera setting because most camera settings can be changed in postprocessing (except for focus, shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and things like Active D-Lighting [Nikon]).
If you are happy with your jpgs, you are free to continue without any interference from us. You are free to ignore any advice given via an internet forum.
PS: raw files frequently look dull and flat when you first look at them with many editing programs because they don't have the camera settings applied to them. Presets are available to do that, which will improve the look of your raw files.
If you are happy with your jpgs, you are free to continue without any interference from us. You are free to ignore any advice given via an internet forum.
PS: raw files frequently look dull and flat when you first look at them with many editing programs because they don't have the camera settings applied to them. Presets are available to do that, which will improve the look of your raw files.
Aug 26, 2018 18:59:09 #
jradose wrote:
I realize I might be opening up a can of worms wit... (show quote)
I seriously reduced my RAW shooting with the D500, in camera processing has come a VERY long way and is pretty much making RAW unnecessary once you customize your in camera processing to match what you do in Photoshop anyway. I have had my D850 for 11 1/2 months now and STILL have not shot a single RAW image with it, the jpegs are pretty much perfect straight out of camera.
With my Canon 5D MK IV I still shoot almost all RAW as the in camera processing just does not offer nearly enough customization and Photoshop is still very much a necessity to get the color and clarity I need in my images.
Aug 26, 2018 19:49:27 #
If you ever get that once in a lifetime shot ,and used anything less than raw you may live to regret it , take a couple shots one with raw and
With out do this with different camera settings , under expose over expose f stops etc , if you have to shoot in haste some times your off
But the raw one might just save the day , you can do more with it in PP if your not quit there with your settings , I shoot every thing in raw
It cost nothing , I doubt if there's a pro taking money shots uses anything but , may be for his kids and famley friends,
With out do this with different camera settings , under expose over expose f stops etc , if you have to shoot in haste some times your off
But the raw one might just save the day , you can do more with it in PP if your not quit there with your settings , I shoot every thing in raw
It cost nothing , I doubt if there's a pro taking money shots uses anything but , may be for his kids and famley friends,
Aug 26, 2018 20:08:25 #
IBM wrote:
If you ever get that once in a lifetime shot ,and ... (show quote)
Ha, ha, ha, you're hilarious!!!
Aug 26, 2018 20:13:20 #
jradose wrote:
I realize I might be opening up a can of worms wit... (show quote)
Of course they will look better than an unedited raw file converted to jpeg. But how do the edited raw files look when converted? Are you looking at average contrast medium level of fine detail images, or are you pushing the envelope? I would not make a hasty judgement based on a few images.
Aug 26, 2018 20:35:07 #
jradose wrote:
Hmmm, never have used Nikon software, will give it a try. Thanks a bunch for the advice, and thank you especially for NOT saying, "ON NO, NOT AGAIN!!"
I'm sorry if I unsettled you with my comment. It was partially in jest, but I also feel that this topic has been rehashed many times, the last time, I believe, about a month ago. I know, I should have just scrolled past the topic title. My bad.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.