mborn Loc: Massachusetts

I am not sure what is being discussed. I print to a Canon pro-100 from LR using the paper ICC and love my final prints that look like I see on the screen. I do not care what type of file the image was printed from just the final product

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

I hear you - but on a daily basis there is bound to be something for everyone - we all have different interests within Photography, and debating is surely one of them?

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Well - the final product is surely paramount to all Hogs. It may just be that there is good - and better (in the eyes of the beholder)?

cthahn

No, raw is equivalent to a negative or positive, it never changes.

dzn1

How would I print a proof sheet from a directory of RAW files?

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

I'm not sure what your exact question is so I will try to answer by giving you the process.

First you have the RAW file. The Raw file has all of the information of the shot and can be manipulated in an editor program. Once the raw file has been manipulated, it is saved. Generally the editing program will not change the RAW file but will add notes or a "side car" with the changes. This leaves the original RAW file untouched (other than the side car or notes). Now, once you have edited the RAW file (remember nothing changed on the original file, even if you resize it the resize is only notes to not include or to change the image size to x by y size and the original is still the same. Now you create a jpg of that edited original. The jpg is a separate file and you still have the original RAW plus the side car. (Note: all programs don't use side cars but they all retain the original raw file and make note about edits and changes so that the original is pristine).

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

OK, since Collie Lover decided to take a side trip in this thread to correct some common spelling errors, let me use the above quote to point out a common grammar error.

Saying "all programs don't use side cars" is like saying "no programs use side cars."
But saying "not all programs use side cars" is equivalent to saying "some do use side cars."

Y'all now dun got dat right??? Eh???

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

Any time someone says they process their RAW files, no matter what the program, my first response is to ask if they first make a virtual copy of the original RAW image. Even though the original is "untouched", if you are using that to edit, then it is no longer available to view or to make other types of edits that might be a different style from what you first tried. The only way to get back the original RAW is to "Reset" your edit. But then you lose your edited version!

So, if you keep your original RAW (like a film negative) separate, make a virtual copy, then save the edits to that copy, then you are moving in the right direction. And saving the edits as .jpg will not do anything to the RAW because "save as" creates a new image file.


It seems the answer to this is no, the print will not be better from either one, since the print from RAW is the extracted .jpg, and the converted .jpg is also the extracted .jpg... However, if you want to continue editing that image, or have all the information in it preserved, you would be better off using .tiff which preserves all the editing made and lets you open it again and continue from where you left off. For instance, I am editing a photo (I use LR and PS) in PS, and have to quit before I am done. This allows me to save what I have done thus far, then re-open later/next day and continue without losing anything. So I do not see any point in saving .jpg files unless you want them for sharing on social media. I keep a separate file for my .jpgs, while the .tiff version of that image goes in my main catalog. Yes, the files are larger, taking up more space, but storage is not expensive so that should not be an issue.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

As long as you do not delete the RAW image it is unaffected. When you save in jpeg you are making a copy of the data in the RAW with processing and compression applied.

Ratta Loc: California

You heard wrong. As long as you do not overwrite your RAW file it remains unchanged. If you make changes then save it under a different name or in a different format. NEVER overwrite your original RAW or JPG files.

plumbbob1

I'll never ask a question like that again.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Don't be afraid to ask a question, just be sure of what you are asking and be as specific as possible.

To recap. When you edit a RAW file (at least in LR) you are not really changing the original file. The software if keeping track of the changes you make in a file (either in a catalog or in what is termed a 'side care file' that ends in 'xmp'. Then every time you open that RAW file, the edit list is read and reapplied to the RAW image. This is one of the very strong reasons to use RAW. You can 'reset' all your changes (this just erases the list of edits) and be back to your original starting point.

When you save as a jpeg you are saving an image file with all the edits applied to the pixel level data. Now the changes in the jpeg are permanent and cannot be 'reset', although a jpeg can undergo further editing. HTH

plumbbob1

Thanks, easy to understand.

Smudgey Loc: Ohio, Calif, Now Arizona

As usual Linda From Maine is on the mark, and I second everything she wrote.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

You can't print a RAW file. Your software makes the conversion to a printable format, whether JPEG or TIFF or something else besides RAW. The RAW file is like computer code that you need a special program to view as a picture on the screen.