RAW and JPEG question
Jun 12, 2019 21:51:10 #
Amadeus
Loc: New York
Yeah cucharared I agree. I just started playing with RAW images, but up until now I did exactly as you do. I "save as" and sometimes I have maybe 2 or 3 save as. Always keeping the original jpg.
Jun 12, 2019 22:05:52 #
Picture Taker
Loc: Michigan Thumb
I guess RAW is better if you really have to fix a picture and JPG is good if you take a good picture.
RAW is in the fixing and JPG is it is either good in the take in. OR use RAW
RAW is in the fixing and JPG is it is either good in the take in. OR use RAW
Jun 12, 2019 22:08:46 #
davyboy
Loc: Anoka Mn.
Streets wrote:
Keep on doing the right thing my fellow traveler. Processing a raw image is similar to chrome plating a turd. It may be shiny but it still stinks. Have you noticed that those in favor of raw tend to bloviate on the subject while jpegers tend to be brief and concise? Could it be that their replies are overly complex to the point which they themselves become confused?
đź‘Ť
Jun 12, 2019 22:11:53 #
Adobe keeps adding features and functions to Adobe Camera Raw, to the point now where a photographer can do most of the processing of a photograph in it.
Scott Kelby puts it this way: Fix it in Camera Raw and finish it in Photoshop.
Scott Kelby puts it this way: Fix it in Camera Raw and finish it in Photoshop.
Jun 12, 2019 22:12:53 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
You seem to be a youngling. At Burger King, you can have the hamburger anyway you want:
Have it your way, have it your way! Have it your way at Burger King!
Hold the pickles, hold the lettuce;
special orders don't upset us.
All we ask is that you let us serve it your way...
We can serve your broiled beef Whopper
fresh with everything on topper.
Anyway you think is proper; have it your way...
Have it your way, have it your way! Have it your way at Burger King!
Hold the pickles, hold the lettuce;
special orders don't upset us.
All we ask is that you let us serve it your way...
We can serve your broiled beef Whopper
fresh with everything on topper.
Anyway you think is proper; have it your way...
Haven’t heard that jingle in years or maybe I just haven’t gone to BK in years.
Jun 12, 2019 22:16:52 #
smf85
Loc: Freeport, IL
Ysarex wrote:
Supposedly: https://hasselblad-com.cdn.prismic.io/... (show quote)
It’s 14 bit data in a 16 bit word - like most systems. This a function of the sensor used. The outputted image data comes as 14 bit.
However the camera processor does do 16 bit arithmetic to create the outputted raw file. Yes a lot goes on before you get an outputted file. RAW is a misnomer - DNG is a better name. No one sees the real raw file - it’s unreadable until the camera processor gets done with it - if you dump it off you’ll have to process it yourself to see anything. It still has the most data possible from the image.
So jpeg is good for fast and easy or to get something from the camera out quickly. Raw/DNG is best to make art with.
Jun 12, 2019 22:21:38 #
dino21 wrote:
Please don't bite my head off for asking this. I ... (show quote)
(DBTROP’s)
RAW has more info to work with and some photos need that extra info to look good.
Good luck!
Jun 12, 2019 22:24:14 #
smf85
Loc: Freeport, IL
cdayton wrote:
There is a group that only shoots RAW, uses manual settings and prime lenses. They are purists and I admire them but life is too short to post process every image so I almost always shoot JPEG. I also tend not to underexpose by several stops. Also, I would challenge anyone to tell me which photos hanging on my walls were shot as JPEG vs RAW.
JPEG is a tool, RAW is a tool - the one that best enables your vision should be used. They are different, have different offerings, but one isn’t inherently better than the other.
Jun 12, 2019 22:37:22 #
Some people need crutches (or THINK they do), some people have money and time to burn .....and some people are more easily satisfied and sleep well and live happily ever after - amen.
.
.
Jun 13, 2019 01:45:04 #
TheShoe
Loc: Lacey, WA
JohnSwanda wrote:
When you make adjustments in the camera with a JPEG you are stuck with them. When you process a RAW file nondestructively you can go back any time and change the settings. I have lots of images I shot as JPEG when I first started digital photography, and I wish I had shot RAW and could go back and process them again with the knowledge I have now.
You can also process a JPEG nondestructively. The problem with JPEGs is that its output has lost some data due to the compression algorithms. If you update a JPEG and replace the original when you save the file, more data is lost in the compression of the new file. For example, if you have a file xyz.jpeg some data from the original raw data has already been lost due to the original compression. If you update xyz.jpeg and save the result as xyz.jpeg (thus replacing the original file), the loss will be compounded. Re[peat that a few times and the loss of data will be readily apparent. The nondestructive method requires that you save any updated version as a different file id.
Your postprocessing requires that any edits of a raw file be saved as something other than a raw file. Because of that, you can always go back to the original file for subsequent updates. When you update a raw file, the common practice is for the PP software to save the updates in a separate file called a sidecar.
Jun 13, 2019 02:05:28 #
dino21 wrote:
Please don't bite my head off for asking this. I ... (show quote)
There' a proverb; "There's no such thing as a dumb question"... How many is a Brazilian?
So perhaps there is such a thing as a dumb question.
However your question is not dumb, anybody who would "throw a kitchen sink at" you
is a braying ass.
Anyway you've had 6 pages so far of good commentary and I don't need to add to that.
Warm wishes and welcome.
Jun 13, 2019 08:20:27 #
Kaib795
Loc: Maryland, USA
Ysarex wrote:
How about an analogy: br br You want a hamburger ... (show quote)
Ah, you've got me laughing! That was great. LOL
Jun 13, 2019 08:36:06 #
smf85 wrote:
It’s 14 bit data in a 16 bit word - like most syst... (show quote)
I have said in earlier post that I was not aware of any camera that has 16 bit RAW but it seems that the new Fuji GFX-100 does.
Jun 13, 2019 09:09:30 #
davyboy
Loc: Anoka Mn.
smf85 wrote:
JPEG is a tool, RAW is a tool - the one that best enables your vision should be used. They are different, have different offerings, but one isn’t inherently better than the other.
Your making way to much sense!đź‘Ť
Jun 13, 2019 09:40:30 #
smf85 wrote:
It’s 14 bit data in a 16 bit word...
If I were an engineer storing 20 million 14 bit data chunks I wouldn't add those two extra zeroes to make it into 16 bit words. It's not necessary. Computers are certainly capable of working with 14 bit words.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.