MabelLucy Loc: Oregon

My answer too

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

BASIC steps without editing details:

1. Open RAW file in editor.
2. Does it look great? Go to step 4.
3. If not, edit until you like it.
4. Save as JPEG.
5. Repeat as needed.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Sadly, your mislabeled basics list above applies to JPEG processing and has nothing to do with the basics of RAW editing. Step / Question 2 is illogical for a RAW situation. Reference the expanded list below that overlaps / restates the probing questions from the reply on page 1.

When you become a RAW photographer, you become the decision maker for these considerations in post processing, where many had been decided by the camera for the JPEG:

1. Sharpening
2. Noise Reduction
3. Color Saturation
4. Exposure adjustments, general
5. Contrast, general
6. Highlights and shadows
7. White Balance
8. Lens corrections
9. Color space
10. Pixel resolution for target image share platforms
11. Disk storage (for the larger files)
12. Image file back-up strategy (for those larger files)

You don't have to understand all these issues, but when you do, you'll be much more successful as a RAW photographer.

papakatz45 Loc: South Florida-West Palm Beach

There is a right way and a wrong way to give constructive criticism. Quite a few of our "master" photographers on the forum, while having good information, need to understand the right way to present it to newbies.

papakatz45 Loc: South Florida-West Palm Beach

Stick with the forum, just ignore the ones who seem to be saying, "Look at me, I am the expert!"

dbrugger25 Loc: Raleigh, NC

I shoot both. I always take the photo in RAW and also the lowest resolution JPG. I can use the JPG for a quick look and dump the unacceptable images (which constitute a LOT of them). I can then identify the RAW images I want to study and edit. I can also use the unedited JPG images as proofs to show to others via email so they can select the ones they like.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Well, I simply answered this question (BASIC does not necessarily include details, didn't say how not detailed. You provided the detail for step 3.):

gwilliams6

I shoot to my dual card slots in my cameras, simultaneously, Raw+Jpeg. Raw to one card, Jpeg to the other card.

Three reasons: It helps my workflow, as I can just download one card right away depending on whether I need to send jpegs out for quick online use or quickly to a publication SOOC.

Or I can take more time and download the raw files and work on them in LR or other programs and get the most out of all the complete photo data captured in the raw files vs the compressed jpeg files.

But most importantly, shooting both formats gives me a backup if a card fails or gets corrupt. I know folks will say that never happens. But if you have been shooting as much as I have in my long pro career, it will happen, and it has happened. And I can not risk losing a paid client's images for a wedding, or any kind of one time event. Actually even my personal work is irreplaceable. And when shooting video, I record the video to both cards simultaneously also as a backup.

And unlike the comments of a certain mister Canon person, YES your raw files can look better than your jpegs with a quick and simple auto click of your raw file in the develop module of programs like LR or such, as you already have more dynamic range and fuller color set and more megapixels to start with in your raw file than that compressed and in-camera processed jpeg file.

As a longtime pro and a professor of photography with my Masters Degree in Digital Photography I have to know this stuff, and I teach this stuff to hundreds of students and countless others I have mentored over the decades.

Cheers

https://www.facebook.com/GSWilliamsPhotography

https://www.facebook.com/groups/3048747915213474

bobfitz Loc: Kendall-Miami, Florida

RAW Always...Camera Raw in Photoshop or Lightroom.

Gjb1706 Loc: Central Florida

You belong here as much as anyone regardless of your experience. I’m strictly a hobbyist and use this forum to improve on my photo taking experience. You can glean a great deal of information and techniques if you give it a chance.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

I am surprised no one even commented on the develop module and taking a quick look at the thumbnails of what your JPEG would look like with your cameras diff. profile settings... That is the first thing I do before determining a starting point... Scott Kelby's simple little checkoff list is great to follow starting with WB and then Checking shadows etc... Basic RAW processing is not that difficult. I also like the Idea of RAW + JPEG as I can easily look at the JPEGs and pursue the RAW PP in the ones I find interesting. Your post was spot on IMHO. Bob

tgreenhaw

I shoot both. SD cards are big and inexpensive.

waymond Loc: Pflugerville, Texas

All good advice for/to a novice. I'm appreciative of answers and questions, which I utilize as needed to improve my skills.

deejay1

I shoot in both RAW and JPEG. RAW files are MUCH larger than JPEG because JPEG files are compressed. If you open a JPEG file, it is uncompressed for viewing. If you then save it, it is re-compressed. Repeated compression/un-compression/re-compression can this lead to degradation of the image. (Simply opening, viewing and closing the file without saving does no harm.) Much more post-processing can be done with RAW images. If you are only doing global image processing (e.g., saturation, contrast, brightness, sharpness, etc.) then JPEG may be the way to go for the smaller file size. RAW images can manipulated and saved without limit and without quality loss because RAW images save the value of every pixel--no compression. So, I use JPEGs for snapshots--easily enhanced and shared with others, and RAW--big and cumbersome and not suited for sharing but amenable to post processing, for more "serious" photographs.

brentrh Loc: Deltona, FL

Raw gives me my negative or image to finish processing with Lightroom or other software which renders finished photograph