Does post processing substitute for shooting in RAW?
Mar 30, 2019 19:33:44 #
IDguy
Loc: Idaho
jpeg images are 8 bit. RAW images 12 or 14 bit. That means 16 to 32 TIMES more information. To say nothing of the effect of compression.
Those advocating jpeg simply don’t get it. Maybe eyesight issues.
Those advocating jpeg simply don’t get it. Maybe eyesight issues.
Mar 30, 2019 19:37:09 #
I bought my first serious camera D7000 back in 2011 and have been shooting JPEG ever since. I have just these past several months began shooting and processing raw images. Yes you can recover more shadows and recover a little more high lights and adjust WB a little easily and precise but that's about the extent of it. Claims of Vast more info recorded are just not true, or should I say, not viewable with the human eye....If it's there and you can't see it, who cares. Personally if I was to do it all over again I would stick to JPEGs in the beginning only because you have enough to learn already. If the shot sucks in jpeg it will suck in raw as well.
Post processing is and should be the least of your worries when first starting out. If you can Nail the exposure in jpeg, then shooting in raw will be a breeze, but it requires learning, relearning different software technics to achieve the end results you want. I would personally worry more about the light I was trying to capture, or the expression of a subject, or capturing that perfect moment then worry about shooting in Raw......Shooting in raw will not make you a better photographer.......
Post processing is and should be the least of your worries when first starting out. If you can Nail the exposure in jpeg, then shooting in raw will be a breeze, but it requires learning, relearning different software technics to achieve the end results you want. I would personally worry more about the light I was trying to capture, or the expression of a subject, or capturing that perfect moment then worry about shooting in Raw......Shooting in raw will not make you a better photographer.......
Mar 30, 2019 20:01:20 #
IDguy wrote:
Nonsense. You can’t recover what isn’t there.
Never said they were better, or anything about recovering what isn't there, just more capable than the predecessors.
Mar 30, 2019 20:05:26 #
IDguy wrote:
Lightroom doesn’t let you choose from dropdown menu with jpegs. But you can adjust temperature and hue.
Nice, but do not have Lightroom...
Mar 30, 2019 20:23:44 #
julian.gang wrote:
I'm wondering does post processing in Lightroom and Photoshop take the place of shooting in RAW?...Julian
Yes, for the most part but not entirely .....depending on the scene dynamic range and exposure.
.
Mar 30, 2019 20:25:47 #
martinfisherphoto wrote:
....Shooting in raw will not make you a better photographer.......
Mar 30, 2019 20:27:11 #
martinfisherphoto wrote:
Claims of Vast more info recorded are just not true, or should I say, not viewable with the human eye....If it's there and you can't see it, who cares. .
Mar 30, 2019 20:34:17 #
G Brown wrote:
Some people are happy to to do little Post Process... (show quote)
The best posting I have read regarding raw and JPEG ! ! - tho there is a bit more to the story.
.
Mar 30, 2019 20:46:26 #
Longshadow wrote:
I've not found how to get the white balance tweaked in a JPEG editor like I can in the RAW editor I use.
Guess I'll keep trying.
But - to each his own.
Guess I'll keep trying.
But - to each his own.
White balance is one of those things that can be corrected to a much greater extent with RAW.
Mar 30, 2019 22:44:42 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
JohnSwanda wrote:
White balance is one of those things that can be corrected to a much greater extent with RAW.
White balance is also one of the parameters that is easy to get right at the time of exposure, with just a little care. If not absolutely correct, then certainly close enough that the final correction is simple to do.
Mar 30, 2019 22:50:36 #
rjaywallace wrote:
Julian - If you don’t want to shoot in RAW mode or deal with the post processing complications of RAW, there is a simple answer: just don’t do it. Old joke - Man hitting his head with a hammer asks doctor, “Doctor, how can I make this headache go away?” Doctor answers, “Stop hitting your head.” 
Thank you, this is advise I will take...Julian
Mar 30, 2019 22:57:15 #
julian.gang wrote:
Thank you, this is advise I will take...Julian
The best advice in this thread is to shoot both formats if you aren't ready to delve deeply into post processing yet. Play with the JPEG images to make them presentable, but save the RAW so that you can decide later if you want to work with a broader range of choices. I have hundreds of images shot only in JPEG that have begged for further post-processing today, now that I have Lightroom and a rather better idea of what I'm doing. I only wish I could go back and take many of them over again with both versions, but many are of people who are gone, moments that won't happen again, and places I'll likely never visit again. Storage is cheap, memories aren't.
Andy
Mar 31, 2019 06:47:14 #
Too much post processing done, in my opinion, period. The picture should start in the mind and heart, transfer to a camera then to an image editor. Once that is done, you decide what YOU like and go with it. I'd rather be out getting the shot than worrying about how someone else will like it, unless there's a paycheck somewhere in the equation. There are exceptions to rules, do what works best for you, but keep shooting. Remember, You took the shot,not the computer. In my humble opinion.
Mar 31, 2019 06:50:08 #
AndyH wrote:
Just the opposite. Post processing of a JPEG is extremely limited in scope. A RAW file allows you much greater control of the image, as well as non-destructive editing. If you DON'T like to post process, JPEG controls are probably enough and can be applied in camera on many models. But if you do, you're severely limiting your choices by not shooting RAW.
Andy
Andy
NO!! JPEG is not EXTREMELY limited in scope. Editing a JPG does NOT have to be non-destructive (just save as a TIF). If your knowledge is so limited - don't advise others!
Mar 31, 2019 07:17:49 #
JohnSwanda wrote:
White balance is one of those things that can be corrected to a much greater extent with RAW.
Then I rest my case.....
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.