rjb0765

I know everyone says to shoot in raw but why? after processing almost 4,000 pics, some in jpeg some in raw I really don't see much difference in the actual abiltity of what the processing program can do. In jpeg I change colors, textures, add effects, exposure, blah blah, and i can do all those same things in raw. Vice versa. Is it just a sales ploy?

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

sloscheider Loc: Minnesota

MOST of the time it wont matter. It's the exception that has convinced me to always shoot in RAW. More image data is stored in the RAW file so when you've got a problem like an under exposed image it's more likely you'll be able to pull some detail out of the shadows.

A Jpeg is a finished product - the camera takes all your settings like white balance and color adjustments and applies them to the image before saving it to the memory card. With RAW images your settings are just stored along with the image data so IF you find the white balance was off you will be able to change it with better success since it was just a setting. The Jpeg version of the image already has the white balance applied and the best you can do is adjust the already set balance which can leave you with some odd results.

It really boils down to how you deal with problems. Lots of folks just write off a bad image and forget about it. Raw can (sometimes) allow you to salvage what would otherwise be thrown out.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

From UHH Frequently Asked Questions and Answers:
FAQ: What is the Difference Between Raw and JPG?
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-26507-1.html

Donwitz Loc: Virginia Beach, VA

A friend of my mine was taking a photo of one her paintings to enter into a juried show. She had a nice Canon point and shoot camera, but the colors looked wrong to her. I shot the painting in RAW, and the colors more closely resembled the actual painting when viewed side by side in natural light. Yes, the RAW file definitely has more editing possibilities. In addition, a properly exposed RAW file is also a closer representation of how the subject originally appeared.

ziggykor Loc: East Texas

But the JPEG is more than simply a finished image with all the settings used included. The camera's image processor has actually decided how much and what data to keep and what to discard when it writes this JPEG file to your memory card. The RAW file, on the other hand retains all the data (reflected light) that the lens allowed to strike the sensor.

Try to recover blown highlights in a JPEG and see if you can equal the ability to do so with a RAW file.

Yes, if you're shooting mostly for web sharing JPEG will usually do. But, if you're planning on "making" photographs, RAW is the best option.

Ziggy

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

The further from perfect exposure the better raw is, color balance is much easier to adjust in raw. Bob.

shadow1284 Loc: Mid-West Michigan

Search RAW on this forum and you will learn and discover more about the subject of Raw than you could possibly imagine.

JJ9 Loc: Sussex County, DE

I guess I wll shift from jpeg fine to jpeg and raw in the camera.

Have 2 questions for anyone who can help.

1-How do you synchronize your computer with your printer? I use Elements.

2-How do you increase resolution. Currently using Nikon 5100..Just got it two days ago, so it is new to me...I'm still struggling to understand all of the settings. Bought the camers because it is said to give a sharp photo...with great tonal span. ( Yes I know it also depends on me.)

On the panel that reads out resolution...the three test shots I took yesterday read out a 300 in Elements...on both x and y axis.

I was expecting something closer to 600. When I go to print in Elements, after choosing the right photopaper, and "best photo" in the printer...it reads out resolution of 720. But when it prints...Epson 1400...it is bland, to me.
.
What am I doing wrong? I am not understanding all of these values. I am also trying to use the histogram in the camera, to see the depth value of the exposure, but don't know how to read the numbers as described under the graph.
I also use the histogram in Elements but whatever I did yesterday...didn't help anything. The visual was still awful...in focus..but still awful.

Help????

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

The big thing is you can impress people. To be even more impressive you can shoot only in M. - Dave

docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado

a RAW file is the digital equivalent of a negative. For some, the kind of work they do requires the RAW file. Others perhaps wish to study the RAW file and metadata to learn what they heck they are doing. Some just like the security of knowing they have the original.


Because of how I shoot I use JPG vs Raw. For me, its more of a logistical issue. Shooting multiple exposures in RAW drains batteries very fast for no appreciable difference.

docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado

300 dpi is ALL you need and ALL pro labs use to print as well.....depth value????? of a histogram???? I haven't a clue what you mean - can you clarify?

I can tell you what I do and what I'd tell you if we were on a field trip together.

Forget the histogram......for now....maybe for ever...but certainly for right now....forget it.

mdorn Loc: Portland, OR

I disagree. The colors looked wrong to her because she probably had her white balance set wrong, or (Canon or not) it was just a crappy point-and-shoot. Moreover, if you were comparing shots on a tiny LCD, then you were comparing JPGs. RAW is not a file format you can print and your camera does not process this data. A properly exposed JPG file is also a close representation of how the subject originally appeared! You just have to know how to setup your camera.

sloscheider Loc: Minnesota

You really need to start a new thread if you want answers to these questions. Actually, start two new threads, one for each question.

wlgoode Loc: Globe, AZ

Another thing to consider is that JPEG is a lossy format. Each time it is viewed and restored it loses just a bit of detail. This problem will not be evident on the first few views but in time the image will visibly degrade.