| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/17/2004 06:19:23 PM · #1 |
I'd been shooting in jpg the most of the time, lately i shot in raw mode, i admit they look a bit better, but when you convert it into a jpg file they may loose quality, right?
So the question is: Does shooting in Raw mode worths vs the big memory you need (card & disk) to get a jpg file at the end?
(Sorry for my ignorance and bad english)
Message edited by author 2004-09-17 18:19:43.
|
|
|
|
09/17/2004 06:36:02 PM · #2 |
If you shoot jpg you've lost some data from the get go. If you shoot in RAW you have all the data to play with and therefore more leeway in your adjustments before you start to see degradations from your adjustments.
|
|
|
|
09/17/2004 06:43:08 PM · #3 |
| Shooting in RAW or JPEG really depends on the situation... Doing landscape work where you don't see much action, RAW is the way to go. Shooting sports where you take lots of pics in rapid succession, JPEG will be better. Either way, when you go to process your pics, open a COPY, do your thing, then save the file as a TIFF - less file degradation that way. If you need to send an edited pic to a printer that requires a JPEG file, then save a file just for printing, i.e. save your TIFF file as image8x10.jpeg. Hope this helps :-) |
|
|
|
09/17/2004 07:09:02 PM · #4 |
| you can always save files after editing to tif and not lose quality. |
|
|
|
09/17/2004 07:24:54 PM · #5 |
| After reading "Camera Raw with Photoshop CS" I'd never EVER shoot anything other than RAW. Even if that meant sacrificing some shots due to limited memory. |
|
|
|
09/17/2004 07:26:22 PM · #6 |
|
|
|
09/17/2004 08:17:27 PM · #7 |
it really depends on how critical you want to be with your photos and prints.
I would rather shoot in medium jpg and get between 330 and 450 pics on a 512mb card than about 50 raw files. My prints come out great and I really dont think a minor improvement with raw will make them extreamly better.
But i will say if the photo and or event is critcal or once in life time oppertunity, then raw would be the best format
James
|
|
|
|
09/17/2004 08:20:00 PM · #8 |
What is "Camera Raw with Photoshop CS"?, a thread?, a book?, a tutorial?.
Originally posted by VisiBlanco:
After reading "Camera Raw with Photoshop CS" I'd never EVER shoot anything other than RAW. Even if that meant sacrificing some shots due to limited memory. |
|
|
|
|
09/17/2004 08:23:47 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by anireno:
What is "Camera Raw with Photoshop CS"?, a thread?, a book?, a tutorial?.
Originally posted by VisiBlanco:
After reading "Camera Raw with Photoshop CS" I'd never EVER shoot anything other than RAW. Even if that meant sacrificing some shots due to limited memory. |
|
It's a book |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 03:06:38 AM · #10 |
I've been shooting RAW for many months now and decided to play around some. I've actually taken advantage of the custom color settings on the 10D and been shooting with the three different "profiles" i've setup in jpg with high iso settings and various custom white balances (set by the Kelvin setting).
I've been getting some really nice styles and since they're not paying shots, i don't mind not having the latitude I do with RAW... it's almost like shooting with film again - a few different settings for a few different "film types". It's made me focus more on exposure, that's for sure.
However - if it's a paying gig, you better bet I'm shooting RAW :)
a couple samples:
 |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 04:16:19 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by digistoune:
Shooting in RAW or JPEG really depends on the situation... Doing landscape work where you don't see much action, RAW is the way to go. Shooting sports where you take lots of pics in rapid succession, JPEG will be better. |
Maybe, maybe not. It "really depends on the situation" even more than that. :) For instance, my D70 takes pictures *much* faster in RAW mode than in JPEG mode, for some reason. But obviously less pictures will fit on the card, so only YOU can decide.
But at least with RAW, you won't do what I've done in the past in JPEG, taken some fabulous pictures of a fleeting moment, only to realize the white balance is waaaaay off. Incandescent setting at sunset? Yuck. Sure you can do some correction on the JPEGs in Photoshop, but when it's that bad... good luck. |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 05:11:13 AM · #12 |
The only time I even contemplate JPG is when I hand the camera to someone else. If I'm behind the viewfinder then the camera is in RAW.
Using Camera RAW in Photoshop CS allows me to correct all sorts of errors which would be very difficult if the file was in jpg where some of the info has already been lost.
Its like having part of your image overexposed and burnt out - once the info is gone there's no way back.
RAW every time. |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 05:23:44 AM · #13 |
JPG. :) For me, I simply do not have the space or processing power to deal with RAW. JPG is also a bit like a slide. It's forcing me to shoot correctly on site, not depend on getting back home to make adjustments.
Down the road, I'll probably shoot RAW more, but right now it just is not something I can afford to do.
Clara
|
|
|
|
09/18/2004 10:42:41 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by animes2k:
I've been shooting RAW for many months now and decided to play around some. I've actually taken advantage of the custom color settings on the 10D and been shooting with the three different "profiles" i've setup in jpg with high iso settings and various custom white balances (set by the Kelvin setting).
|
Using the custom color settings is still useful in RAW mode. The application you use to convert the RAW file should read the custom setting and use it as the default for the conversion. Of course, you always have the freedom to tweak it, but you probably don't have to so it saves time.
I used this technique on my Backlighting challenge entry. I first shot the bare makeshift lightbox and set it as the custom white balance. Then I shot various arrangements of fruit and rock slices using that setting. When I did the RAW conversion (using C1 REBEL), it knew what I wanted "white" to be so I didn't have to set it for each photo. |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 10:56:15 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by blemt:
JPG. :) For me, I simply do not have the space or processing power to deal with RAW. JPG is also a bit like a slide. It's forcing me to shoot correctly on site, not depend on getting back home to make adjustments.
Down the road, I'll probably shoot RAW more, but right now it just is not something I can afford to do.
Clara |
A good reason to use JPG. Another one is time; if you get everything right in camera, you've saved a processing step by not having to do RAW conversion. And, of course, JPG is a lot simpler. So simple, in fact, that you can take your memory card to most any photo processing facility for printing and archiving on CD; you don't even need your own computer!
RAW sacrifices all these for flexibility. |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 11:08:15 AM · #16 |
I shoot JPEG because I don't know how to work with RAW images 
June
|
|
|
|
09/18/2004 02:29:08 PM · #17 |
I used to always shoot RAW with my G2. Gives you more control, and there's no JPEG artifacts in your original.
In experimenting with my new 300D, I have to say it's even more important (unless my camera is defective) because the AWB doesn't seem to do a good job for high ISO shots indoors without flash. Very unbalanced. If I set it to tungsten, they come out good, but then I'll forget to change it in the next situation! Shooting RAW eliminates this problem completely, because WB can be easily changed on the computer.
Does anyone know of a free/cheap PS/PSe filter that quickly fixes white balance issues in JPEG frames (for those family shots where I do use JPEG) |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 03:02:57 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Does anyone know of a free/cheap PS/PSe filter that quickly fixes white balance issues in JPEG frames (for those family shots where I do use JPEG) |
You might try the technique detailed in the tutorial "How to remove a color cast from an image" by moodville. It's not PS filter or action, but it works like a charm.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2004 08:35:31 PM · #19 |
I think that if you began with a high enough quality jpeg and edit and save properly than ANYONE would be hardpressed to definitely know whether or not the file originated as a Jpeg or a RAW file. If your white balance is really out of wack than you may wish your file was in RAW to best color correct it but if you stay close to begin with, which is, in part, what I mean by starting with a high enough quality Jpeg than you are fine. I have no problem doing all kinds editing to my jpeg files and this includes white balance corrections, curves, levels, and sharpening. What everyone needs to keep in mind is that when you open a Jpeg file in your image editor it is no longer a Jpeg, it is now in the native format of your image editor. The quality will not be degraded any further unless you choose to re-save it again as a jpeg and even that largely depends on what compression level you set. Just save the file out as a Tiff if you want absolutely no change in quality or if you are pretty sure you will edit the file further. The quality of Jpegs can be bad but they can also be excellent and in most cases visually indistinguishable from uncompressed files. I don't have a RAW option on my camera but I am very familiar with the format and I have done extensive comparisons between the uncompressed Tiff files from my camera and the highest quality Jpegs. I don't see any differences except for the file sizes. If I had RAW capabilities I would definitely consider using it in many situations if the shooting situation provided enough time to capture them and I had enough storage space but for the majority of situations I would probably continue to shoot jpegs. I would want to make sure that the camera captured high enough quality Jpegs, however, as they do vary from camera to camera. There are some known issues with the new Sony F828 Jpegs and there are many cameras that don't capture Jpegs with a low enough compression. So it really does depend on a lot of factors. The Jpegs from my camera look very good to me so I am very happy with working with them.
T
|
|
|
|
09/18/2004 09:12:06 PM · #20 |
I shoot RAW. I haven't had the camera in Jpeg mode for several months. I just like the results I get with RAW and I have my workflow pretty much down pat, so I'm not fumbling around.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2004 09:26:12 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I shoot RAW. I haven't had the camera in Jpeg mode for several months. I just like the results I get with RAW and I have my workflow pretty much down pat, so I'm not fumbling around. |
I think that's great that you have a good workflow with your RAW files that you are happy with but what exactly do you mean by fumbling around in regards to Jpegs. I'm asking because I also have a good workflow with my Jpegs and it seems to me that you could fumble around with any format if you don't know what you are doing.
T
|
|
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: 08/10/2025 04:44:16 PM EDT.
