Tom DePuy Loc: Waxhaw, N.C.

How do I convert a raw file to jpeg??





Thanks

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

That depends entirely on the software you have available to you. Most PP programs will convert.

Frank T Loc: New York, NY

MT is right. One thing you can try in all of them is "Save as" and then enter jpg in the file type.

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

Check the software that came with your camera. Their is usually a basic program that will get you started.

You need to process the raw file for the best results.

MWAC Loc: Somewhere East Of Crazy

As the other members have mentioned you need an editing software to convert RAW files to Jpeg. Once you open the file it's as easy as "File As"

Tom DePuy Loc: Waxhaw, N.C.

Thanks,,,,

Also was wondering what are the benifits of shooting in raw vs. jpeg??


Thank's for ny input
Tom

Pepper Loc: Planet Earth Country USA

Here is one mans opinion and an interesting read.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Pepper,
Kens statements are interesting, and pretty much true for the time that he wrote them. This opinion was written in early 2004 while Ken was still shooting a 2.47mp Nikon D1H. At that time processing speed was at a premium and RAW files were in their infancy. JPG was also not acknowledged as a "lossy" file format at that time. Raw has changed and cameras have changed significantly in the last 8 years. Nikon has openly stated that, just like its lenses, NEF (Nikons RAW) files will ALWAYS be compatible with all their software, be it View, Capture or something new, their NEF files will never be obsolete. Adobe is a bit different in their take on obsolesence, they like to make everything obsolete as soon as possible so they can sell you new "better" versions, but so far Kens view on obsolesence has proved to be no more than fear factor.
Todays software can do things with RAW files not even dreamed of 8 years ago, except maybe in the minds of software engineers. JPG is still the easily transferrable compression standard, and probably will be for years to come. Maybe they will even develop JPG2 at some point that totally reverses the lossy trait of the format, that remains to be seen.
As it stands today, I doubt there are many serious photographers out there who would disagree with me in my opinion that RAW is the best way to go if you plan on doing any serious manipulation or correction of your in-camera work prior to saving and archiving the finished product. I do not save my RAW images after I make my corrections and save them to TIFF format, but I archive an original TIFF on a seperate portable hard drive, and those that I treasure most I also record onto CD and put them in a fireproof safe. JPGs are kept on a second portable drive for easy access. I name my TIFF and JPG files with the same name, the extension (and the file size) make it easy to tell which I am working with.
I do not print anything larger than 8x12 off of a JPG file, I use TIFF exclusively for my larger prints, the largest of which has been a 60" x 80" display piece for Sturgis Bike week, and it looked fantastic!! (Expensive as hell though)

To end this novel I will say that RAW is not for everyone, but if you have the capability of doing PP in RAW I think you at least owe it to yourself to try it before you condemn it, or discard it for fear of the unknown. It can open up whole new worlds of creativity if you want it to.

Pepper Loc: Planet Earth Country USA

Certainly not condemning nor discarding I actually shoot in RAW + JPEG Fine. I just thought that Ken's article was interesting and does offer some food for thought.

JimH Loc: Western South Jersey, USA

Whatever you do, don't just load up a RAW image and do a "Save As..." to convert to JPG right away. If you do that, you're better off just letting the camera do it right off the bat. RAW files nearly always need some sort of tweaking, from sharpness or white balance to contrast and saturation. If you save directly to a JPG file, it will look horrible.

The benefit of RAW files is that, IF YOU WANT TO, you can do all sorts of fancy post-processing to manipulate the image into something that more closely approximates what your Mind's Eye saw when you took the picture.

You do NOT HAVE TO shoot in RAW if you don't want to. The Photoshop Police will not come to your house and make fun of you.

There are Definite Benefits to using RAW files, but only if you care to spend the time processing with them. If you don't, just set your camera to the highest resolution/size JPG that if offers, and knock yourself out.

rweinholdt

This months Photoshop Techniques has a good article on RAW.
http://www.photoshopelementsuser.com/magazine/v9n1/

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

One has to be a subscriber to view articles on this magazine.

drobbia Loc: Near Middletown, CA

I think most newer dslr cameras have a "shoot RAW and Jpeg" option within the camera. I usually shoot in Jpeg but if I'm on a serious assignment I'll shoot "jpeg and raw"= uses up batteries, however.

MWAC Loc: Somewhere East Of Crazy

I raise you a Ken Rockwell with a Fro Knows

http://froknowsphoto.com/raw-vs-jpeg-vs-ken-rockwell-interview/

If you have never seen Fro Knows Photography you are missing out, he's very informative and adds a sense of humour to his blog posts and videos.

Tom DePuy Loc: Waxhaw, N.C.

Thnaks for all the feedback..........it's been a help



Tom