Raw photos: I have never taken any pictures in RAW. Should I try it and does it convert with GIMP? Is it easy to figure out or do I have to do anything special?

Hollyl Loc: Connecticut

I have never taken any pictures in RAW. Should I try it and does it convert with GIMP? Is it easy to figure out or do I have to do anything special?

picpiper Loc: California

Hollyl wrote:

I have never taken any pictures in RAW. Should I try it and does it convert with GIMP? Is it easy to figure out or do I have to do anything special?

You should take a few minutes to do some searches here for "raw" or "shooting raw", or "Gimp". There is a deep well of knowledge here, and many people willing to answer, but it is much easier to answer specific questions posed by someone who has done some reading of prior posts. I did a search for "raw" and suggest you read this: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-7591-1.html

Hollyl Loc: Connecticut

Thanks for the advice. I also did some research last night. I think I might try a few shots.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Hollyl wrote:

I have never taken any pictures in RAW. Should I try it and does it convert with GIMP? Is it easy to figure out or do I have to do anything special?

If you decide to shoot in raw, make sure your camera is set to raw+jpg. That way, you'll have usable photos, regardless what you decide to do with the raw.

Photogdog Loc: New Kensington, PA

Hollyl wrote:

I have never taken any pictures in RAW. Should I try it and does it convert with GIMP? Is it easy to figure out or do I have to do anything special?

I used to JPEG on a routine basis. I started shooting RAW last year. The good news is that RAW images can be processed over and over again without loss of image data. The bad news is that the files take up a lot more space on the memory card.

Raw is like having a film negative that you can develop over and over again in different ways (you save the changes in JPEG, TIFF or proprietary PP format). Crop, lighten, darken, change hue and/or saturation, layer masks, etc. But the original RAW file isn't modified.

photophool Loc: Grosse Pointe Park, MI

jerryc41 wrote:

Hollyl wrote:

I have never taken any pictures in RAW. Should I try it and does it convert with GIMP? Is it easy to figure out or do I have to do anything special?

If you decide to shoot in raw, make sure your camera is set to raw+jpg. That way, you'll have usable photos, regardless what you decide to do with the raw.

I used to shoot RAW+JPEG, but found it a waste of memory. I shoot strictly RAW now because I can batch convert any and all photos to JPEG if necessary. Lightroom and Elements will do this, as well as the very nice, and free, program called Faststone http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm. I'm not familiar with GIMP, but do believe it will convert as well.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Hollyl wrote:

I have never taken any pictures in RAW. Should I try it and does it convert with GIMP? Is it easy to figure out or do I have to do anything special?

No. Don't try it until you read this article on raw:
vss jpg. http://www.slrlounge.com/raw-vs-jpeg-jpg-the-ultimate-visual-guide

If you decide to try raw, remember that raw looks like crap out of the camera. You don't just convert a raw using GIMP or any other raw editing program. raw is like the ingredients of a cake. Put the ingredients of the cake in a bowl and it looks like crap. But mix the ingredients and bake the cake and now you've got a beautiful end product. Now think of this cake being able to be undone back to just the raw ingredients again so that you can add bananas or chocolate chips and bake it again for a different outcome. You can do this over and over with a raw image. With a jpg image file the cake is baked in the camera. About all you can do with it now is add toppings and slice it. You can't put anything else into the cake.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

[quote=jeep_daddy]

Hollyl wrote:

If you decide to try raw, remember that raw looks like crap out of the camera.

Not true...perhaps it depends on the camera. If you properly expose the image, you should have very little to do editing wise to convert it. I shoot in raw because I can get finer details with those files (and recover more of my mistakes) than I can with the Jpg files.

Regardless of the above...it doens't hurt to try, but I would suggest shooting Raw + Jpg for a while, and figure out for yourself which one is better. For me, it's RAW.

Bob55 Loc: Valhalla NY

Sorry to be dense but I shoot in RAW, edit in Picasa and upload to a Picasa web site. Picasa converts my edited photos to JPEG when uploading to my website. Why (& how) am I to convert from RAW to TIFF, etc.? Thanks to whoever can spell it out for me. Bob

Bob55 Loc: Valhalla NY

Sorry to be dense but I shoot in RAW, edit in Picasa and upload to a Picasa web site. Picasa converts my edited photos to JPEG when uploading to my website. Why (& how) am I to convert from RAW to TIFF, etc.? Thanks to whoever can spell it out for me. Bob

photophool Loc: Grosse Pointe Park, MI

[quote=Cdouthitt]

jeep_daddy wrote:

quote=Hollyl br If you decide to try raw, remem... (show quote)

When I was still shooting RAW + JPEG, I had inadvertently left my white balance on Tungsten, and shot outdoors under a bright sun. I could not color balance the JPEG photos satisfactorily using Elements 8. No matter what I did, they looked like garbage. I was, however, able to correctly balance the RAW shots. That's when I stopped shooting JPEG. There is so much more latitude in correcting/improving a RAW image vs. JPEG. I have yet to see the photo, regardless of format, that couldn't be improved at least a little by post processing.

picpiper Loc: California

Bob55 wrote:

Sorry to be dense but I shoot in RAW, edit in Picasa and upload to a Picasa web site. Picasa converts my edited photos to JPEG when uploading to my website. Why (& how) am I to convert from RAW to TIFF, etc.? Thanks to whoever can spell it out for me. Bob

Why do you want/need to convert to TIFF or any other format? Your out of the camera RAW file has the best and most compact image data. If you actually have a need for other formats download and install IrfanView and its full compliment of plugins.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

picpiper wrote:

quote=Bob55 Sorry to be dense but I shoot in RAW,... (show quote)

I convert to TIFF when I intend to submit an image file for printing at the custom lab where I live. They produce much better colors than JPEG. I wish I could show you side-by-sides.

picpiper Loc: California

photophool wrote:

quote=jerryc41 quote=Hollyl I have never taken a... (show quote)

Overall, I found the JPEGs created by my D5100 are generally better than converted RAW .nefs. Admittedly, only slightly, but consistently better. I still shoot RAW + JPEG. If the photo is "snapshot" or family web album content I delete the RAW and keep or post the JPEG. If something catches my eye and warrants PP, I keep them both.

picpiper Loc: California

LoneRangeFinder wrote:

quote=picpiper quote=Bob55 Sorry to be dense but... (show quote)

Bob55

Your RAW > Picasa > JPEG workflow is perfectly fine for general photography. But you are missing out on a large part of the benefit of capturing RAW images. When Picasa opens the RAW file for viewing it is making on-the-fly assumptions and adjustments to the photo and has to ignore a large part of the actual data that is in the RAW file. It actually does a pretty amazing job. However, RAW converters like Adobe Camera Raw and Capture NX2 allow you to make far more adjustments for total control of the final image.