|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/15/2003 12:00:12 PM · #1 |
can you folks please chime in about using RAW vs Jpeg..
would you never use JPEG again, does RAW make so much difference in your shots and post processing is the file size extra time worth it??
etc... thanks |
|
|
|
08/15/2003 03:24:29 PM · #2 |
Unfortunately I do not have the ability to capture in RAW format, yet, but I am convinced it would be worth it. 16 bit files as apposed to 8 bit files mean greater dynamic range and the potential for better color accuracy and detail. Many pro cameras and now even the new Sony F828 prosumer camera will take a RAW file and a Jpeg file simultaneously so you can still enjoy viewing the jpegs but still have the RAW files or when you want to serious edit particular files. I only edit the few images that I really like anyways so for me it wouldn't be a big deal. The benefits of RAW would out-wiegh any extra time spent on editing. RAW gives you an image with the must information to work with and that's the most important thing for me.
|
|
|
|
08/15/2003 04:31:36 PM · #3 |
The best we can do on the F707 is get uncompressed images (TIFF format). I believe that on the Canon (which I don't own, so I'm only guessing) RAW images are much more than that. Remember that each "pixel" on a CCD or CMOS sensor can only pick up light intensity, not color information. So, there are red, green or blue color masks over each element, and each color pixel in the final output is a combination of 4 or 5 elements. So are the Canon RAW files are actually the uncombined elements, and you still need to process them later? The advantage being you could choose your own software to do the processing.
Also, are the unprocessed pixels in those RAW files actually 16 bits per pixel? I'm not convinced all 16 bits are significant. I don't think sensors in today's consumer/prosumer cameras are physically sensitive enough to capture that much precision. I'd have to find some more info.
Some editing tasks in 16 bits would be a good idea, especially if you save and re-edit alot. |
|
|
|
08/15/2003 04:36:07 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by jkiolbasa:
The best we can do on the F707 is get uncompressed images (TIFF format). I believe that on the Canon (which I don't own, so I'm only guessing) RAW images are much more than that. Remember that each "pixel" on a CCD or CMOS sensor can only pick up light intensity, not color information. So, there are red, green or blue color masks over each element, and each color pixel in the final output is a combination of 4 or 5 elements. So are the Canon RAW files are actually the uncombined elements, and you still need to process them later? The advantage being you could choose your own software to do the processing.
Also, are the unprocessed pixels in those RAW files actually 16 bits per pixel? I'm not convinced all 16 bits are significant. I don't think sensors in today's consumer/prosumer cameras are physically sensitive enough to capture that much precision. I'd have to find some more info.
Some editing tasks in 16 bits would be a good idea, especially if you save and re-edit alot. |
Most RAW image files maintain 12 bits of information per color channel. Putting it into 16-bit format gives additional headroom for editing to avoid losing detail unrecoverably.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2003 11:14:41 PM · #5 |
| My minolta 7i allows for tiff and raw images i believe, but I get so few shots on my sticks I don't use these hardly ever. Also my first shot I entered here was from done in raw mode, the original lighting was spectacular. I was SO disappointed with the way it looked once it was posted, I decided I prefered not to see the 'great' images that for most practical purposes I had to reduce in some way, i.e. for dpc or to email ect. So for the most part I shoot in my highest quality jpeg mode. Just seems mre practical to me. I am glad that I have the option to use higher settings, but for my current purposes and skill level they are unnecessary for me. Just my thoughts. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 05:58:38 PM  |
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: 08/28/2025 05:58:38 PM EDT.
|
