Do you shoot in the raw? (Page 8): Gramps, you left out one particularly important step in your work flow. Immediately after "I shot it". The next step is, I let the engineers, who...

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Gramps wrote:

That's total B.S. The camera didn't tap me on the shoulder or ring a bell---I picked the subject---I framed it---I shot it---the finished product was my picture---I didn't need a contrivance gimmick to lick my egotistic face.

Gramps, you left out one particularly important step in your work flow.

Immediately after "I shot it". The next step is, I let the engineers, who wrote the software the camera uses to cobble together the pixels into a .jpg, do the post processing for me.
--Bob

banjonut Loc: Southern Michigan

MT Shooter wrote:

I have never shot in "the raw", I doubt my neighbors would appreciate it too much. ;-)

I'm with MT on this one. For sure I would be breaking more than one zoning ordinance.

Gramps Loc: Republic of Tejas--Tomball, TX

rmalarz wrote:

Gramps, you left out one particularly important step in your work flow.

Immediately after "I shot it". The next step is, I let the engineers, who wrote the software the camera uses to cobble together the pixels into a .jpg, do the post processing for me.
--Bob

Maybe so, but it was still my shot---not my picture! It's not, really my picture, until someone says, "Chuck, you did good!".

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Gramps wrote:

Maybe so, but it was still my shot---not my picture! It's not, really my picture, until someone says, "Chuck, you did good!".

Chuck, I'd never debate whose photo it was. You are correct in that it was your shot. Nor are you at fault for using jpg format. It's an age old debate that will go on forever. The final image is the goal, regardless how we choose to arrive at it. The path is neither correct, nor incorrect. Each has it advantage or disadvantage, as seen from the point of the one taking the photo.
--Bob

mdorn Loc: Portland, OR

philo wrote:

when I was in England on the last day all I had left was a one g card.
If I shot in Raw I could get 25 images, if I shot in Jpeg I could get 125 images.
I went with jpeg and the images were ok, not great.

I don't know... for me one great picture is better than 125 "just ok" pictures. You should have stuck with raw. On the other hand, did it ever occur to you that those 125 "not great" pictures were a result of something other than the file format?

We put a lot of emphasis on shooting raw to maximize the amount of data we have to later manipulate, but each shot needs to be evaluated separately in my opinion. Now maybe I'm not as good at making lemonade out of lemons, but a large majority of my shots wouldn't benefit from PP the raw data. How do I know this? Because like others I shoot both RAW+JPG, but end up deleting the majority of the raw data and going with the in-camera JPG. Like I said in a previous post, I like to know I have the option to PP a raw photo, but most of the time the JPGs are great with very little tweaking.

mdorn Loc: Portland, OR

rmalarz wrote:

Chuck, I'd never debate whose photo it was. You are correct in that it was your shot. Nor are you at fault for using jpg format. It's an age old debate that will go on forever. The final image is the goal, regardless how we choose to arrive at it. The path is neither correct, nor incorrect. Each has it advantage or disadvantage, as seen from the point of the one taking the photo.
--Bob

:thumbup: Intelligent response! Well done.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Gramps wrote:

So what's yer point? You have an aversion to lower right hand corners? You see, that's just it, you PP addicts can't leave anything alone. I suppose you'd like to be able to order up the Grand Canyon monochrome so you can "improve" on it!

Hi, Chuck,
My point wasn't to criticize. it was just F.Y.I. Any photographer would notice the blown highlights...they just distract and annoy some people more than others. my bottom line was, and is...that's a lovely image!
Dave (also a " Gramps" who used t'hail from Brazos County!) now in SD

CocoaRoger Loc: Cocoa Florida

This question comes up frequently so I saved these three images. They are all the same picture. I got out of the car and took a picture of a water fountain. You can see the original image over exposed, then the best I could do to the jpeg with Photoshop, then the final one is when I adjust the RAW file and saved it as a jpeg. You can see that RAW gives you much more ability to make adjustments in post processing. Most photo's I take are jpeg but if there's ever a question on exposure or settings or if the photos will be irreplacable then I always shoot also in RAW so that if I messed something up I'll have a better chance at fixing a mistake if I need to.

Weyoun7 Loc: Fremont, CA

I always shoot in raw only. All processing is done in DxO Optics Pro, Lightroom and/or Photoshop CC.

PhotoMan1929 Loc: Virginia, USA

Glen H wrote:

I'm contemplating shooting pictures in raw, instead of JPG.
What are your thoughts on this? Does it produce a better picture? I guess if it is to be posted on line it needs to be converted to a different format anyways!?!?!?

Glen

Glen, regardless of other people's opinions, you, and you alone, must be the final arbiter of what processes or techniques you use. If you wish to try RAW format, use it, give it a FAIR and HONEST evaluation. Make up you own mind after using it for a time.

Now, having said that, I will tell you that I use JPEG more than 99 percent of the time. When I have a tough lighting situation, or otherwise wish to do deep post processing, I will use RAW.

Severe post processing will reduce the bit-depth. JPEG has little spare bit-depth and serious post processing treatment may result in banding or "posterization." So, I use JPEG when I can. and RAW when I must.

I have been taking pictures since 1935, when I was six years old. I have learned always to seek the simplest, most direct methods. to avoid "fads." or unnecessary complication.

I have an acquaintance, a former photojournalist, now retired. He spent the last eight years of his career using digital cameras exclusively. He tells me he never used any format but JPEG. He needed to get his images back to headquarters as quickly as possible. No time for playing around. Incidentally, he says he often hid his big DSLR and usd a simple Canon compact P&S to look more like a tourist instead of a journalist. Skill trumps all.

Use RAW if you wish. Enjoy yourself. But do not fall into the trap of saying "I always shoot RAW," as though that makes you a superior photographer.

jeryh Loc: Oxfordshire UK

This subject has caused more controversy than almost any other in terms of photography. If you have a relatively modern digital camera, and take JPEGs, you will get a properly exposed image, determined by the camera
settings. if you had not herd of Raw, like as not you would have been quite
satisfied. Ente RaW. All of a sudden, now you an mess about with your image, using all the information that the camera took, unprocessed.
But now, you have an excess of information which YOU have to process !
This takes up a lot of room on your hard disc, and will take you a lot of time and effort to get, ostensibly the same result ! Your choice- I don't bother anymore, `i just use JPGs, much simpler, quicker and I get the
the same result !

Photo One Loc: Clearwater Florida

I always shoot in Raw, and Jpeg. If you need to see it right away, Jpeg will allow it. You will get a much better picture after it is processed in raw.

Don't let MT Shooter fool you. I flew over his place a few months ago, and he was outside shooting in the raw. What a sight!!!

Gramps Loc: Republic of Tejas--Tomball, TX

rmalarz wrote:

Chuck, I'd never debate whose photo it was. You are correct in that it was your shot. Nor are you at fault for using jpg format. It's an age old debate that will go on forever. The final image is the goal, regardless how we choose to arrive at it. The path is neither correct, nor incorrect. Each has it advantage or disadvantage, as seen from the point of the one taking the photo.
--Bob

Yes, but the drum beat, instead of rim shot, expresses the attitude, "that was good"---but "I" could have done it better!

Gramps Loc: Republic of Tejas--Tomball, TX

CocoaRoger wrote:

This question comes up frequently so I saved these... (show quote)

So how come you didn't check your screen, notice it was undesirable and change your CAMERA settings according? It's not as though the subject was going to run away from you. I'm still not convinced!

CocoaRoger Loc: Cocoa Florida

Gramps wrote:

So how come you didn't check your screen, notice it was undesirable and change your CAMERA settings according? It's not as though the subject was going to run away from you. I'm still not convinced!

I don't care.