Check out Digital Artistry section of our forum.
Why we shoot RAW
May 2, 2015 08:31:45 #
An example of what can be done to a RAW image. When I saved the unprocessed image from RAW to JPG at maximum quality it was almost 28MB. This one was reduced a bit to save HOG storage space. Most of the editing was in Camera Raw, about what you would do in LR as seen in the numerous tutorials on Youtube.
Robert
Robert
May 2, 2015 09:06:13 #
An outstanding demonstration of using RAW. Thanks for sharing, and I can see I'm going to have to explore this further.
Michael
Michael
May 2, 2015 09:44:38 #
steffro1 wrote:
An example of what can be done to a RAW image. When I saved the unprocessed image from RAW to JPG at maximum quality it was almost 28MB. This one was reduced a bit to save HOG storage space. Most of the editing was in Camera Raw, about what you would do in LR as seen in the numerous tutorials on Youtube. Robert
Very nice images from your region! The enhanced edited version is indeed artistic, but - respectfully - which is closer to what most viewers actually saw?
Check out People Photography section of our forum.
May 2, 2015 11:00:46 #
Done from your (RAW) JPEG.
Under the low light conditions you were shooting, RAW was the better choice. But shooting in JPEG would not have been a total loss. Perhaps that's why most DSL cameras have that option on the Menu.
In all fairness you should have shoot in RAW JPEG and post the those two images along with your processed. That would have been a more betterest gauge for comparison.
Under the low light conditions you were shooting, RAW was the better choice. But shooting in JPEG would not have been a total loss. Perhaps that's why most DSL cameras have that option on the Menu.
In all fairness you should have shoot in RAW JPEG and post the those two images along with your processed. That would have been a more betterest gauge for comparison.
May 2, 2015 12:26:15 #
I agree, but I didn't have the JPEG any more. I formatted the second card already before I though of posting it!
Robert
Robert
Bill Houghton wrote:
Done from your (RAW) JPEG.
Under the low light conditions you were shooting, RAW was the better choice. But shooting in JPEG would not have been a total loss. Perhaps that's why most DSL cameras have that option on the Menu.
In all fairness you should have shoot in RAW JPEG and post the those two images along with your processed. That would have been a more betterest gauge for comparison.
Under the low light conditions you were shooting, RAW was the better choice. But shooting in JPEG would not have been a total loss. Perhaps that's why most DSL cameras have that option on the Menu.
In all fairness you should have shoot in RAW JPEG and post the those two images along with your processed. That would have been a more betterest gauge for comparison.
May 2, 2015 12:29:16 #
I never even looked at the jpeg file, I just save it in case something happens to the RAW file. When I take my trip to the Galapagos in August, I'll probably switch to just RAW to save space for all the pictures.
Robert
Robert
rjaywallace wrote:
Very nice images from your region! The enhanced edited version is indeed artistic, but - respectfully - which is closer to what most viewers actually saw?
May 2, 2015 12:31:22 #
Have a great trip, if you need a luggage bearer that works cheap let me know.
May 3, 2015 09:30:31 #
May 3, 2015 12:01:46 #
steffro1 wrote:
I never even looked at the jpeg file, I just save it in case something happens to the RAW file. When I take my trip to the Galapagos in August, I'll probably switch to just RAW to save space for all the pictures.
Robert
Robert
Yeah, I shoot both, but don't really do anything with the jpeg. If it is shots of an 'event', I can upload some jpegs quickly to let people see what is coming. Then, I import the raw files into LR and go from there.
May 3, 2015 14:11:06 #
I can't say it is a representation of the advantages of shooting RAW.
I took your "unprocessed" jpeg into Lightroom and the attached is what I got with my normal processing for RAW images. It is what you might have gotten with a jpeg from the camera which applies similar adjustments to the RAW file...except that I changed the ratio when cropping to one you'd only get with a Live View on my camera (D800).
(I cropped to get rid of the boat or whatever on lower right but then decided a 16:9 using rule of thirds might help a bit as well. I applied some noise reduction which your camera would also have done rendering jpeg. I didn't change white balance but usually use daylight for sunsets. The colors came from adjusting highlights, shadows, whites and blacks as I do to all my images.)
I took your "unprocessed" jpeg into Lightroom and the attached is what I got with my normal processing for RAW images. It is what you might have gotten with a jpeg from the camera which applies similar adjustments to the RAW file...except that I changed the ratio when cropping to one you'd only get with a Live View on my camera (D800).
(I cropped to get rid of the boat or whatever on lower right but then decided a 16:9 using rule of thirds might help a bit as well. I applied some noise reduction which your camera would also have done rendering jpeg. I didn't change white balance but usually use daylight for sunsets. The colors came from adjusting highlights, shadows, whites and blacks as I do to all my images.)
May 3, 2015 15:19:24 #
With more noise reduction.
Hmm. It looks a little lighter here. I didn't think I did anything that should have affected that. Oh well.
Hmm. It looks a little lighter here. I didn't think I did anything that should have affected that. Oh well.
Check out Smartphone Photography section of our forum.
May 13, 2015 10:26:42 #
rjaywallace wrote:
The enhanced edited version is indeed artistic, but - respectfully - which is closer to what most viewers actually saw?
if, indeed, this question rhetorically states the speaker's sole reason for engaging in photography, then he has no significant reason to engage in capture of raw image data and much unarguable reason to continue to capture jpegs.
however, to respond to the O.P.'s original question, I must state, categorically, that my reasons for making an exposure are, now that I am retired from a professional career as a pathologist, only rarely to record "what I actually saw..."
Dave
May 16, 2015 15:34:59 #
Uuglypher wrote:
if, indeed, this question rhetorically states the ... (show quote)
I have no idea what you just said. Categorically and rhetorically. But perhaps his question was related to the unlikely shadows that were brightened to excess.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Drone Video and Photography Forum section of our forum.