DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> My First RAW Entry (8th Place)
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 24 of 24, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/04/2006 11:23:33 AM · #1
I was very skeptical about submitting a RAW-based entry until I could learn how to convert and edit RAW. Until the day of this shoot, I had never shot, much less, edited a RAW file. However, the devil on my shoulder said, "Go ahead--what do you have to lose?"

So, my very first RAW shooting session was a unique situation, the sun was setting and the sky was purple-ish orange. If I screwed this up (either capturing in RAW or converting it back at home), I would have never forgiven myself.

At any rate, I was pleasantly surprised when it placed 8th overall in the Purple II challenge with an average vote of 6.5311.

Thank you to all who voted and made such helpful (and motivating) comments.



Message edited by author 2006-10-04 12:50:32.
 10/04/2006 01:21:30 PM · #2
Welcome to the dark side. There's no turning back.

I can't understand how anyone cannot shoot in RAW mode. You have to make sure you get it right the first time if you shoot in JPEG. That's really daring.
 10/04/2006 01:24:40 PM · #3
Yes, time to prepare for your HD to be munched up quite a bit faster. I went to RAW probably about a year ago now and I have never looked back.
 10/04/2006 01:38:08 PM · #4
Good choice :-) RAW adds a bit to your workflow, but it is quite forgiving and flexible in so much that it is a "little" harder to screw up. :-)
 10/04/2006 01:42:46 PM · #5
just about to take that step myself ... looking into bigger compact flash cards

:)

comgratulations on your entry
 10/04/2006 07:39:53 PM · #6
Originally posted by Nullix:
Welcome to the dark side. There's no turning back.

I can't understand how anyone cannot shoot in RAW mode. You have to make sure you get it right the first time if you shoot in JPEG. That's really daring.


Just yesterday, I took a shot that was only available to me at that moment, and then it was gone. I made the mistake and had the camera in Tungsten WB setting (from a previous shoot). Luckily, it was in RAW, so when I loaded it into my RAW editor (Photo Laboratory 3), I just changed the WB setting and life is good.
 10/04/2006 08:41:18 PM · #7
I've got you beat - my first RAW photo came 5th in the desolation challenge - my best ever (so far, fingers crossed for a current challenge) And now shoot everything except family photos in RAW.
 10/04/2006 08:48:31 PM · #8
why wouldnt you shoot family photos in raw? you can do more with them than jpgs. shoot the raw, edit and save as a jpg and delete the raw if you run out of hard drive.
 10/04/2006 08:53:38 PM · #9
I shoot RAW + JPEG now, using the JPEG (in lowest resolution) just for previewing on my notebook. Always have RAW for processing (except for the "Straight from the Camera" challenge.)
 10/04/2006 09:20:20 PM · #10
Originally posted by jfwolpert:
why wouldnt you shoot family photos in raw? you can do more with them than jpgs. shoot the raw, edit and save as a jpg and delete the raw if you run out of hard drive.

Lots of reasons
Becasue I shoot 1000's of them
mostly baby photos
I have plenty of time to get all the settings right
the baby isn't moving very fast
very slow processing with a old computer
my wife looks after most of the baby photos and she doesn't want to deal with raw
the intended use doesn't require using raw - mostly they are reduced to 800pixels and put on the web for all our relatives to look at

Of course if the situation demands it I'll use RAW but most of the time jpg is good enough
 10/04/2006 09:27:22 PM · #11
Looks like you got great results. Congrats on your placing. I also don't understand why people shoot in jpg only mode. Why make things harder on yourself?
 10/04/2006 09:47:32 PM · #12
Talmy (and others shooting/saving a jpeg to get a thumbnail for a RAW):

If you are running Windows XP, google & download the "Microsoft RAW Image Thumbnailer and Viewer" which provides a high quality thumbnail for supported Canon & Nikon models. I don't use the viewer, but the thumbnails are a welcome addition to hunting for a RAW in my folders!
 10/04/2006 11:07:06 PM · #13
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Yes, time to prepare for your HD to be munched up quite a bit faster. I went to RAW probably about a year ago now and I have never looked back.

I recently installed a couple of network drives on my home network. I think I'm up to around 1 terabyte's worth of storage. Even so, it won't be long before I fill those.

I probably need to do some major house cleaning of my photos. I need to delete the ones that I'll never used or will use. I've burned quite a few on DVD, but it's just a drop in the bucket. There's just not enough hours in the day. :(

BTW, in the current challenge, "Unrelatedness", my second ever RAW submission is fairing pretty well with a 6.1065 right now. We'll see...


10/04/2006 11:53:24 PM · #14
Originally posted by lesgainous:
I was very skeptical about submitting a RAW-based entry until I could learn how to convert and edit RAW. Until the day of this shoot, I had never shot, much less, edited a RAW file...

At any rate, I was pleasantly surprised when it placed 8th overall in the Purple II challenge with an average vote of 6.5311.


Oh, goody! There is hope for me.

I don't know nothin' 'bout birthin' no RAW files either, but still submitted my first RAW image. Hope I do as well as you. You will recognize mine. It is the entry with all the numbers and unprintable special characters. I thought that looked better than the converted picture.

My carefully conceived plan for getting a good score is to threaten voters with bodily harm.
 10/05/2006 12:43:42 AM · #15
Originally posted by stdavidson:
I don't know nothin' 'bout birthin' no RAW files either, but still submitted my first RAW image. Hope I do as well as you. You will recognize mine. It is the entry with all the numbers and unprintable special characters...

LOL! Yeah, going in cold with RAW, I thought for sure I'd end up with some demonic message embedded in my resulting EXIF. :D

Shown below is my second-ever RAW file uploaded to DPC. It wasn't in a challenge. I missed the Silhouette III challenge by a few weeks, but I thought it was worthy of my portfolio.


10/05/2006 01:04:05 AM · #16
Originally posted by lesgainous:
Shown below is my second-ever RAW file uploaded to DPC. It wasn't in a challenge. I missed the Silhouette III challenge by a few weeks, but I thought it was worthy of my portfolio.


Nice job. Beautiful image.

I was a little confused when I took my first pictures in RAW format. I misinterpreted and instead of taking pictures "in RAW" I took pictures "in the RAW". It is amazing what a difference an innocent little word like "the" can make. My court appearance is next week.

Note: Edited for improved humor.

Message edited by author 2006-10-05 01:09:29.
 10/05/2006 01:12:34 AM · #17
Originally posted by lesgainous:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Welcome to the dark side. There's no turning back.

I can't understand how anyone cannot shoot in RAW mode. You have to make sure you get it right the first time if you shoot in JPEG. That's really daring.


Just yesterday, I took a shot that was only available to me at that moment, and then it was gone. I made the mistake and had the camera in Tungsten WB setting (from a previous shoot). Luckily, it was in RAW, so when I loaded it into my RAW editor (Photo Laboratory 3), I just changed the WB setting and life is good.


erm, if you're shooting RAW, then it doesn't make any difference what your WB is set at. the camera is going to record the scene as is, regardless.

Message edited by author 2006-10-05 01:15:35.
 10/05/2006 01:17:42 AM · #18
Originally posted by photoheathen:
Originally posted by lesgainous:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Welcome to the dark side. There's no turning back.

I can't understand how anyone cannot shoot in RAW mode. You have to make sure you get it right the first time if you shoot in JPEG. That's really daring.


Just yesterday, I took a shot that was only available to me at that moment, and then it was gone. I made the mistake and had the camera in Tungsten WB setting (from a previous shoot). Luckily, it was in RAW, so when I loaded it into my RAW editor (Photo Laboratory 3), I just changed the WB setting and life is good.


erm, if you're shooting RAW, then it doesn't make any difference what your WB is set at. the camera is going to record the scene as is, regardless.

Mmmm I think that was the point of the post anyway...
 10/05/2006 02:58:05 AM · #19
Originally posted by photoheathen:
Originally posted by lesgainous:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Welcome to the dark side. There's no turning back.

I can't understand how anyone cannot shoot in RAW mode. You have to make sure you get it right the first time if you shoot in JPEG. That's really daring.


Just yesterday, I took a shot that was only available to me at that moment, and then it was gone. I made the mistake and had the camera in Tungsten WB setting (from a previous shoot). Luckily, it was in RAW, so when I loaded it into my RAW editor (Photo Laboratory 3), I just changed the WB setting and life is good.


erm, if you're shooting RAW, then it doesn't make any difference what your WB is set at. the camera is going to record the scene as is, regardless.

Hmm...the image came out with a deep blue tint all throughout the image. It was a late afternoon shot, low sun and long shadows. I shot in RAW, but had the WB set at Tungsten.

All I know is that I changed the WB to daylight in my RAW editor, and viola! it was just as one would expect.

So, are you saying that it shouldn't have had that blue tint? It should have been correct at the time of capture, regardless of WB setting?
 10/05/2006 03:06:03 AM · #20
Originally posted by lesgainous:

Hmm...the image came out with a deep blue tint all throughout the image. It was a late afternoon shot, low sun and long shadows. I shot in RAW, but had the WB set at Tungsten.

All I know is that I changed the WB to daylight in my RAW editor, and viola! it was just as one would expect.

So, are you saying that it shouldn't have had that blue tint? It should have been correct at the time of capture, regardless of WB setting?


Well, yeah. That's sort of the point of RAW, is that you're capturing the scene precisely as it exists, with no in-camera modifications. Of course it's possible that your particular camera handles things differently, although I've never heard of that before.

Message edited by author 2006-10-05 03:07:49.
 10/05/2006 03:33:31 AM · #21
congratz !
i've never shot jpeg. even with my ixus i pretended to have RAW :-)
 10/05/2006 09:47:32 AM · #22
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Good choice :-) RAW adds a bit to your workflow, but it is quite forgiving and flexible in so much that it is a "little" harder to screw up. :-)


My 30D is the 1st camera I have had that does RAW so it was all new to me but I read the manual front to back a few times, lots of research and after taking a couple of shots in one of the predefined jpg modes on the camera to verify its operation I immediately switched it to manual and havent looked back.

Only time my camera ever shoots out of manual mode is if my wife is using it. I tought her what the little pics on the dial mean and told her set it accordingly when she shoots and then she can point and click to her hearts content......especially since the 8gig cards maxes out the pic counter at 999 :).
 10/05/2006 10:17:43 AM · #23
Originally posted by photoheathen:
Originally posted by lesgainous:

Hmm...the image came out with a deep blue tint all throughout the image. It was a late afternoon shot, low sun and long shadows. I shot in RAW, but had the WB set at Tungsten.

All I know is that I changed the WB to daylight in my RAW editor, and viola! it was just as one would expect.

So, are you saying that it shouldn't have had that blue tint? It should have been correct at the time of capture, regardless of WB setting?


Well, yeah. That's sort of the point of RAW, is that you're capturing the scene precisely as it exists, with no in-camera modifications. Of course it's possible that your particular camera handles things differently, although I've never heard of that before.


Many RAW editors (EOS Viewer Utility is one) preview the RAW image in the editor with the parameters the camera was set at; then you change 'em around to what you want 'em to be. This is characteristic of RAW editors designed for the average consumer, because a "true" RAW image, as displayed, looks like absolute junk mostly, muddy and weak. It's enough to scare anyone away from shooting RAW if they don't know what's happening.

So that's why your images looked blue when you loaded 'em up, and as you changed the WB parameters they began to look right.

R.
 10/05/2006 11:18:46 AM · #24
Originally posted by nheilweil:
Talmy (and others shooting/saving a jpeg to get a thumbnail for a RAW):

If you are running Windows XP, google & download the "Microsoft RAW Image Thumbnailer and Viewer" which provides a high quality thumbnail for supported Canon & Nikon models. I don't use the viewer, but the thumbnails are a welcome addition to hunting for a RAW in my folders!


Actually, the reason I shoot RAW+JPEG is that the smaller JPEG image can be displayed full screen much faster than the RAW, which has to be processed first. It wasn't that bad with my 6mp D70, but has become intolerably long with my 10mp D200 on my iBook. None of this is an issue on my fast Windows XP desktop system.

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/13/2025 11:53:51 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/13/2025 11:53:51 PM EDT.