SteveR Loc: Michigan

I thought I'd see what Ken Rockwell had to say about shooting RAW. Apparently he doesn't think too much of it. I don't know that he discussed portraits. Here's the link.

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

Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY

I agree with Ken, but it's fun to talk about, like Nikon vs Canon, Mac vs PC. It helps forums to grow. Besides, saying you shoot in "raw" adds a sense of professionalism and mystique to others. Wow, you only shoot in raw?

Pepper Loc: Planet Earth Country USA

Thanks, very interesting and certainly a lot to ponder.

snowbear

Raw-vs. JPEG . . . another never-ending debate in photography!

I do read Mr. Rockwell's articles, but I certainly would not take them for gospel (read the first paragraph in his "about" page.)

In a nutshell - if you want maximum control over your photos, shoot raw. If you are more interested in shooting than processing, shoot JPEG.

3Dean Loc: Southern California

After reading the article, I get the impression that this person enjoys looking down his nose at amateur and hobbyist photographers.

From the linked article, he says the following:

"Please just don't take it personally that I prefer to get my shots right the first time instead of having to tweak them later."

"If you intend to spend hours twiddling with individual shots or have enough time to waste piddling in chat rooms then go ahead and shoot raw."

"While everyone was in chat rooms yesterday I spent the day consulting on a shoot of a $7,000,000 home."

"Prolific shooters shoot JPG because time is money and we are able to get things right the first time."

"Raw formats, like Nikon's NEF and Canon's CRW, are aimed at people who have the time to piddle around after a shoot to make up for what was not set correctly in the first place. Theses folks are the ones who also have the time to spend in chat rooms instead of actually photographing."


For an alternate view on the use of RAW see this article by Petteri Sulonen:
http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/How_to/o_RAW_workflow/_RAW_workflow.html

Personally, I shoot RAW+JPG. The JPGs give me an easy way to review my pictures, and the RAW gives me more flexibility to be creative with the final image.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

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.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

MT...I thot he mentioned it was 2008.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

2008 is in the article as the latest copyright date but he says 2004 in the text, and that he was still using the D1H at the time. Looks like the article has been added onto and edited a few times over the years.

heltonjkv96 Loc: southwest Virginia

There's a big difference in RAW and JPEG...Just set your camera to shoot one of each and look at them..

SteveR Loc: Michigan

MT...I have bookmarked the link that 3Dean provided. I've scanned it and intend to read it more thoroughly. It looks like a good article.

I think the best answer to this question is to experiment in RAW, which I intend to do. I hope to get PSE 10 soon and will see what happens. I think my D7000 may take a copy both in RAW and JPEG. It's possible that Nikon's software View NX2 will open and process RAW files.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Your D7000 will not only shoot RAW and JPG at the same time, it will also save them to different SD cards if you choose that option. I often do that so I have a basic JPG image to save and compare to my later PP work in RAW. I will open my saved TIFF AND my original JPG side by side and it always amazes me the difference between them. I usually just discard the original JPG file right after comparison and save a JPG version of my manipulated TIFF. I NEVER shoot in JPG only, but with my D90 I shoot in RAW only simply because it only has the single SD card slot and recording both the RAW and the JPG on that one card takes too much time, my shooting buffer usually balks at the 5th shot in continuous mode when I try. The dual slots in the D7000 with individual recording control are a work of genius in my opinion.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

I have a lot of respect for Ken Rockwell and have met hime and talked to him at a couple of Photo Expos. His article has been amended a few times as I just reread it again and can see some of the expanded areas from the original I read several years ago. He has his opinion and it works for him, and you know what they say about opinions.

On another note, here is another article by Ken from 2009. He is still anti RAW, but I agree with his stand on this issue strongly. Most of my best work is on old film and digitizing it after all these years is what got me back into my photography.

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

RobertMaxey

I do admire arrogance; it is a trait shared between those of us that know what's what, and, well, the rest of you. Thank Golly sakes I am near flawless.

SMILEY!

I do like his work. I spent some time looking at his large format film images. Could not see many digital images, but what do I know anyway.

I have been researching the issue and e-listening to the experts. What I have learned is this:

1- Everyone has an opinion which is wrong, just ask Mr. Google
2- Shoot RAW and convert to tiff
3- Shoot jpg and be happy
4- Shoot RAW and convert to jpg or pdf files or whatever
5- Shoot neither and buy a 11 x 14 View camera
6- Cannon digital stinks, buy a Nikon
7- Nikon digital stinks, go get yourself a Cannon
8- Hasselblad digital is the best, so go borrow sixty grand
9- RED has its own proprietary RAW format and it can photograph movies like the upcoming Spider Man and Lord of the Rings because of its quality, and their latest digital still/movie cameras will create ultra high quality images, Peter Jackson is using 48 of the beasts to film LOTR in 3D and Mr. Jacking is an expert and I am but a clueless fool so but a RED, just ask them
10- Some manufacturers prefer hype to hypo
11- Beginners are welcomed here and decried by some professional on another list, who just had a gallery showing, sold his work to Lady Gaa Gaa for hundreds of thousands of dollars and is 14 years old the next year, so lets all use what this child uses, he rules and he went Nikon because they sent him one of everything
12- Professionals that love Nikon might actually be paid to promote Nikon
13- Every time you think you have the answer, someone posts a link to a site that disagrees
14- When someone disagrees, they prove their point by posting a link to a site with a different view and that disagrees with even more sites and it never ends
15- I am going back to film and screw this digital stuff. No wait, scratch that because Kodak is soon dead and gone so I am back to searching for a digital camera
16- I am pulling my hair out, and I will soon shoot myself and ask God for the truth. I mean, I can never get through to Kim Kommando
17- He will tell me this: "It is Film my son, it has always been film" We no longer sell Kodachrome, however
18- It is both impossible to find the right answer and easy to find the wrong answer all in the same day. Tomorrow, you learn you were wrong and the camera you finally buy will be replaced the next day with double the pixel count, 34 more features, and at one third the cost. It will introduce a brand new file format, but back ordered for a year

alienmurphy Loc: Alaska

That article was written January 09, three years ago. The author might not believe now what he did at that time. Too many sites don't delete obsolete info or update the outdated info.

dragonfist Loc: Stafford, N.Y.

I don't think he is saying anything of the sort. The way I took it was that a pro will get it right the first time, that's why they are called pro's. As a pro he is shooting to make money and in any job time is money. If you can deliver a good product in a shorter time by using a quicker method it is money in your pocket. He is talking from a professional standpoint and I am sure he would rather spend his time at his craft making money than be on chat rooms making conversation.


.