Why shoot raw?
Dec 10, 2011 09:49:52 #
Dec 10, 2011 10:03:34 #
Better control of your exposures......in case you get your camera settings wrong........hey.....it happens. Why lose a great shot,right? Also captures more information then a jpeg.
Dec 10, 2011 10:40:06 #
Raw makes for easier post processing, and it isn't lossy like a jpeg is. The downside is you have to convert it to something else for web viewing or printing, they are memory hogs, and I can't shoot continuous for more than a few clicks before my camera starts to really slow down. The first two issues are not a big deal - I have extra cards and converting them is effortless. The last thing is a bit more of a problem, so I switch to jpeg if I'm going to be shooting continuous.
Dec 10, 2011 11:24:10 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
IF you're shooting something with a short tonal range and IF you don't get the exposure wrong, JPEG is fine -- but if you want to manipulate the image, or if you make a mistake, Raw is a better idea. I get about 180 M9 Raw images onto a 4 GB card, which is fine by me, but as Charlie says, if you want to shoot continuously the camera's memory can soon clog up. I always shoot Raw for anything that matters, and as I don't feel like toggling between Raw and JPEG, that means everything.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
Dec 10, 2011 11:54:44 #
lindysuewho wrote:
Just curious as to your reasons for doing so.
Shooting JPEG and lets say you use your camera to open and show images to friends...everytime you close the image...it distorts with pixels, and do it enough times it will damage your captured image. Note has never happened to me, but the class of study I was attending gave that reason not to shoot only in JPEG as from the obvious you want your data as stated earlier. L3
Dec 10, 2011 11:58:10 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
ltruex wrote:
Shooting JPEG and lets say you use your camera to open and show images to friends...everytime you close the image...it distorts with pixels, and do it enough times it will damage your captured image. Note has never happened to me, but the class of study I was attending gave that reason not to shoot only in JPEG as from the obvious you want your data as stated earlier. L3
lindysuewho wrote:
Just curious as to your reasons for doing so.
Shooting JPEG and lets say you use your camera to open and show images to friends...everytime you close the image...it distorts with pixels, and do it enough times it will damage your captured image. Note has never happened to me, but the class of study I was attending gave that reason not to shoot only in JPEG as from the obvious you want your data as stated earlier. L3
Gosh, I'd never heard that before. It's a bit hard to see how it might happen, at least with a JPEG stored in a computer, but I know less than nothing about the way in which cameras store, open or close images. Thanks for the information. Did the teacher give any references?
Cheers,
R.
Dec 10, 2011 12:02:06 #
I like the fact that I'm free to forget one setting....White Balance ! I leave it on Auto..if it doesn't look right, I change it in processing ! Comes in very handy in the North East right now....snow can be tough depending on the amount of sun available ! I can eliminate the blue tint later and bring more fine details out in processing the RAW file !
Dec 10, 2011 12:03:23 #
Rodger it has been a decade ago, and I hardly remember his name. But wait around I'm sure others will have more on the subject. L3
Roger Hicks wrote:
quote=ltruex quote=lindysuewho Just curious as t... (show quote)
Dec 10, 2011 12:03:37 #
Shooting RAW gives more creative post options. Programs like Photoshop and Capture One have tools specifically for getting the most out of RAW originals.
You might think of it as taking a can of white paint, divide it evenly into two buckets. In one bucket, dilute the paint with an equal amount of water, and add a teaspoon of white pepper. Mix thoroughly.
Now paint with the undiluted paint and the diluted paint with pepper. You will sort of get similar results, but the diluted paint will be thinner, less color intense, and have a few weird specs of white pepper showing up.
Full strength paint = RAW
Diluted Paint with Pepper = JPEG with lossy artifacts.
You might think of it as taking a can of white paint, divide it evenly into two buckets. In one bucket, dilute the paint with an equal amount of water, and add a teaspoon of white pepper. Mix thoroughly.
Now paint with the undiluted paint and the diluted paint with pepper. You will sort of get similar results, but the diluted paint will be thinner, less color intense, and have a few weird specs of white pepper showing up.
Full strength paint = RAW
Diluted Paint with Pepper = JPEG with lossy artifacts.
Dec 10, 2011 12:06:43 #
Dec 10, 2011 12:10:23 #
RAW is the only way to fly.
8-)
PhotoArtsLA wrote:
Shooting RAW gives more creative post options. Pro... (show quote)
8-)
Dec 10, 2011 12:17:39 #
I shot JPeg for years and one day mistakenly shot in RAW. It was like pictures from a whole new (and improved) camera!! Now if I'm taking sunset, landscape, portrait, still life shots, I'll shoot RAW. Action shots I'll shoot Jpeg as to not slow down the burst shooting mode. Yes, the downside to RAW is it is memory consuming and time consuming in the post, but I enjoy post-processing. Most cameras allow you to shoot in RAW and JPeg at the same time. Some of the middle & higher end DSLR's have a button right on the body to let you toggle back and forth without having to go into the menus.
Dec 10, 2011 12:21:25 #
asylum1972 wrote:
Slow down is the downside, but some of that is your flash card and why pros shoot high speed cards...but my real reason for the post...do you have access to setting small raw files...otherwise you may be shooting large files, which really slow you down.I shot JPeg for years and one day mistakenly shot ... (show quote)
Dec 10, 2011 12:44:08 #
ltruex wrote:
Shooting JPEG and lets say you use your camera to open and show images to friends...everytime you close the image...it distorts with pixels, and do it enough times it will damage your captured image. Note has never happened to me, but the class of study I was attending gave that reason not to shoot only in JPEG as from the obvious you want your data as stated earlier. L3
lindysuewho wrote:
Just curious as to your reasons for doing so.
Shooting JPEG and lets say you use your camera to open and show images to friends...everytime you close the image...it distorts with pixels, and do it enough times it will damage your captured image. Note has never happened to me, but the class of study I was attending gave that reason not to shoot only in JPEG as from the obvious you want your data as stated earlier. L3
NO - opening and closing a jpeg does not do anything to the image. You will get degradation when you edit and re-save the file.
Dec 10, 2011 13:00:26 #
"opening and closing a jpeg does not do anything to the image. You will get degradation when you edit and RE-SAVE the file"
Exactly right!
I learned to think of it this way:
Raw is the equvalent of shooting with a negative- you can adjust exposure & color balance and have more latitude.
JPEG is like shooting transparencies- very little latitude- better get it right in-camera. Although you can adjust JPEG files in Adobe Camera Raw and recover images better than with the usual corrections.
Exactly right!
I learned to think of it this way:
Raw is the equvalent of shooting with a negative- you can adjust exposure & color balance and have more latitude.
JPEG is like shooting transparencies- very little latitude- better get it right in-camera. Although you can adjust JPEG files in Adobe Camera Raw and recover images better than with the usual corrections.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.