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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> RAW vs FINE!
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 40 of 40, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 09/24/2004 09:37:29 AM · #26
I've been asked to possibly do a wedding, if I wanted to shoot in raw, about how much memory would I need? I have a 256 and a 1 gig.
 09/24/2004 09:54:38 AM · #27
Originally posted by kyebosh:
I've been asked to possibly do a wedding, if I wanted to shoot in raw, about how much memory would I need? I have a 256 and a 1 gig.


Depends entirely on how many pictures you want to take. You'll DEFINITELY have to be conservative with your shooting if you can't unload your memory cards during the shooting.

When I shot a wedding in July, I shot partly in JPEG, partly in RAW. Even when I was shooting JPEG, I had to empty my memory cards (2GB worth of cards) in the middle of the day.

Let's see, I think the 300D's raw files are something like 8 or 10 MB, so:
1250 / 10 = 125.

That's only 125 pictures on your cards together. Probably NOT enough for an entire wedding event. I guarantee that you will run out of space at the worst possible time.

I'd get more cards, AND a way to unload the cards (laptop etc.) during the day, or stick to shooting JPEG. Probably you can take 3 or 4 times as many pictures with JPEG.

You might still want to shoot the really important portaits of the bride and groom etc. in RAW though, because you really want these enlargements to look perfect.
 09/24/2004 09:55:02 AM · #28
Originally posted by kyebosh:
I've been asked to possibly do a wedding, if I wanted to shoot in raw, about how much memory would I need? I have a 256 and a 1 gig.


I'm shooting my first wedding tomorrow...in RAW! I have with me 5 Gig worth of storage cards. That equates to just under 700 photos and that to me is more than enough. I shot 2 days of National Skating Titles a few months back and came out with about 700 photos after 16 hours work so for me even enough storage for 400 would be enough...but I always prefer to have too much than not enough. I am also lucky enough to be in a position to get my memory cards cheap so that does help.

In answer to the main question of this thread, since discovering RAW I would never shoot something as serious as a wedding in anything but RAW. I prefer the freedom of it!
 09/24/2004 10:01:39 AM · #29
Personally, If I were shooting an entire wedding, I'd shoot the ceremony and the formals in RAW, because they are the most critical to get right.

For the Reception, I'd shoot most of the candid shots in JPEG fine with the WB set to tungsten and a rosco full sun gel over the flash. Depending on the lighting, I would consider switching back to RAW for the cake cutting, bouquet toss, and the first dance. But I'd prolly forget and shoot in JPG anyway.

That's just what I'd do, YMMV.
 09/24/2004 10:05:08 AM · #30
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Personally, If I were shooting an entire wedding, I'd shoot the ceremony and the formals in RAW, because they are the most critical to get right.
[...]


I have to agree here. If space is limited (i.e., you don't have a huge stash of 8GB Lexars in your bag) then it's wise to consider where the space is most effectively spent.
 09/24/2004 10:17:16 AM · #31
Originally posted by kyebosh:
I've been asked to possibly do a wedding, if I wanted to shoot in raw, about how much memory would I need? I have a 256 and a 1 gig.


If you figure that about 40 images can fit on a 256MB card... You should consider close to 10 256MB cards.

At our wedding, the photographer took just over 300 images, not all of which are perfect wall-hangers or even perfect wallet keepers. Out of the 300, we chose roughly 30 to go into our album, even though we really were torn over about 50 to 60 images we wanted to put into the album.

Hope that helps!
 09/24/2004 12:03:46 PM · #32
Originally posted by Nelzie:
In the Canon FileViewerUtility 1.3, which allows you to view, tweak and convert RAW to TIFF format, there is a White-Balance tool called "Click White Balance". With one Mouse click, you select that tool, with the second Mouse Click you select what is supposed to be white in your image. That's two clicks.

The utility has a handful of other settings that can be used to tweak an image before conversion to TIFF for whatever final edits you may wish to perform. For instance, you can change the Exposure Compensation by up to two full stops. That's a very powerful ability. Since you have the Canon 10D, get that application installed, shoot something in RAW and bring it into that application. Experiencing that application is far better then I would ever be able to describe it.


I do have this software, and have rarely used it since opening up an Explorer window worked great for me as far as keeping track and filing away my photos. I also use Bulk Rename Utility which renames everything without changing the exif data.

I do use my manual white balance settings and am very excited about the 20D's white balance settings menu!!! Even more control!!!

I don't have Photoshop CS sadly, but even so, FileViewer and Photoshop are so much slower at looking at thumbs than WIndows Explorer is. I have little patience when sitting in front of my monitor... i have lots of patience in front of my camera. I will try it though. I am not one to dismiss good advice!

When my 20D comes in, I will shoot a few in RAW for a test. :)
Arie
 09/24/2004 12:20:32 PM · #33
Originally posted by mirdonamy:

I do have this software, and have rarely used it since opening up an Explorer window worked great for me as far as keeping track and filing away my photos. I also use Bulk Rename Utility which renames everything without changing the exif data.

I do use my manual white balance settings and am very excited about the 20D's white balance settings menu!!! Even more control!!!

I don't have Photoshop CS sadly, but even so, FileViewer and Photoshop are so much slower at looking at thumbs than WIndows Explorer is. I have little patience when sitting in front of my monitor... i have lots of patience in front of my camera. I will try it though. I am not one to dismiss good advice!

When my 20D comes in, I will shoot a few in RAW for a test. :)
Arie


The reason that the FileViewer Utility takes so long to display images is that it is 'decoding' the RAW information based on the camera settings at the time of the shot.

It also takes a bit of time to resample the image after altering the settings, because it goes back to the original RAW data and 'decodes' it once again to produce what you see on screen.

It's a long and sometimes tedious process, but I have found that the results are often well worth it. That has been especially true in regards to the Exposure Compensation feature, I am still extremely far from an expert when it comes to working exposure properly. That feature has helped me draw out details and also minimize washed out areas in more then a few shots.
 09/24/2004 12:46:58 PM · #34
Originally posted by Nelzie:
Originally posted by mirdonamy:

I do have this software, and have rarely used it since opening up an Explorer window worked great for me as far as keeping track and filing away my photos. I also use Bulk Rename Utility which renames everything without changing the exif data.

I do use my manual white balance settings and am very excited about the 20D's white balance settings menu!!! Even more control!!!

I don't have Photoshop CS sadly, but even so, FileViewer and Photoshop are so much slower at looking at thumbs than WIndows Explorer is. I have little patience when sitting in front of my monitor... i have lots of patience in front of my camera. I will try it though. I am not one to dismiss good advice!

When my 20D comes in, I will shoot a few in RAW for a test. :)
Arie


The reason that the FileViewer Utility takes so long to display images is that it is 'decoding' the RAW information based on the camera settings at the time of the shot.

It also takes a bit of time to resample the image after altering the settings, because it goes back to the original RAW data and 'decodes' it once again to produce what you see on screen.

It's a long and sometimes tedious process, but I have found that the results are often well worth it. That has been especially true in regards to the Exposure Compensation feature, I am still extremely far from an expert when it comes to working exposure properly. That feature has helped me draw out details and also minimize washed out areas in more then a few shots.


The canon RAW software is so stinkin', mind numbingly SSSSSSSSSSSSLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW to load RAW files, not because it takes a specific amount of time to decode RAW files, but because it is written poorly. I applaud anyone who actually uses it on a regular basis, because I find that you need the patience of Job to work with it at all.

I use C1 LE, it loads images so much faster, is much easier to work with and and provides, IMO, better results. You can try it free for 30 days.

There are other programs as well, like BreezeBrowser, but I haven't used them.
 09/24/2004 12:50:58 PM · #35
Yeah, i have no patience! So, I will look into the C1 LE for 30 days after I get my 20D and start trying to shoot in RAW. I am pretty darn good with White Balance, in-camera... but the LCD is small. So, it can be hard to really tell what's going on without putting it on your big screen... but then again, my computer monitor sucks! :)
 09/24/2004 12:57:55 PM · #36
Thatnks for the heads up Spazmo99. I thought the slight slowness was related to the speed of my PC more then anything else.

I will take a glance at the C1 LE software. If it runs faster by more then a few factors on my system, I will seriously consider snatching it up.
 09/24/2004 01:16:50 PM · #37
For quality and abilty to fix the image, RAW is the way to go. It is your digital negative and allows you to do so much post-shoot adjusting from exposure to color saturation to even resizing (at least with my olympus and PhotoShop CS). You will be able to retain much more quality by shooting in RAW but you will need much more space so may I suggest an item I absolutly love...from //www.kanguru.com/fcrw_slim.html

Flash Card Burner, Portable DVD Player & CD Burner!

The ultimate multimedia device! The Kanguru Slim FC-RW can be used to backup Flash Cards directly to CD without a computer! Connect directly to a TV for viewing pictures or playing DVDs. Also works as external CD-RW, an Audio CD Player and an external 8 in 1 Card Reader. A rechargeable battery makes it perfect for portable use plus it comes with a remote control for DVD Playback functionality and Flash Card Burning and viewing! Take it on trips for all your multimedia needs!

Features:
- Backup flash card data to a CD without a computer
- Play DVD's or view pictures on your TV
- Works with 8 different media types
- Disc Spanning Capabilities (for copying large format cards)
- Can burn multiple Flash Cards to one CD
- Built-in Rechargeable Battery

Wonderful for on the go downloading of images.
 09/24/2004 01:31:17 PM · #38
Makes no odds- quality only comes into question if your printing huge sizes.

As for being able to 'fix' your images. Well you can either learn how to use your camera and take the time to setup correctly or fire away without any thought and spend your time fixing it at the computer table.

Both are fine ways of achieving the same result - one isn't really as fat as the other - however the process of editing RAW is more time consuming that JPEG.

So depending on the situation and conditions choose which is most beneficial. For a wedding I would shoot JPEGs purely for the buffer improvements. I like candid wedding shots and being able to squeeze a few extra frames of per second means a lot. Anyway WB is fixable in PS with JPEG..

Try to remember the important thing in photography (especially weddings is capturing the day, what it's all about, how much love they feel and how much fun the guests are having.

Don't worry about how perfect technically they will be, or how spot on her dress is - chances are you will blow out a lot of it anyway as this sometimes can't be helped.

Get back to basics and worry about capturing a moment.

Message edited by author 2004-09-24 13:31:56.
 09/24/2004 01:40:20 PM · #39
Originally posted by mirdonamy:
Yeah, i have no patience! So, I will look into the C1 LE for 30 days after I get my 20D and start trying to shoot in RAW. I am pretty darn good with White Balance, in-camera... but the LCD is small. So, it can be hard to really tell what's going on without putting it on your big screen... but then again, my computer monitor sucks! :)


You will want to make sure that the C1 SW has implemented support for the 20D before you try to play.
 09/24/2004 01:41:47 PM · #40
Originally posted by Nelzie:
Thatnks for the heads up Spazmo99. I thought the slight slowness was related to the speed of my PC more then anything else.

I will take a glance at the C1 LE software. If it runs faster by more then a few factors on my system, I will seriously consider snatching it up.


It is like night and day.

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/21/2025 12:55:35 AM

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: 09/21/2025 12:55:35 AM EDT.