RAW vs. JPEG

Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:45 pm Post subject: RAW vs. JPEG

I think we've discussed it before? (but I couldn't find a specific post??)
And I'm making a poll about it! Razz

Most of this will be for the DSLR users, but there are a few point and shoots that can shoot RAW file format and anyone can toss in.

What do you shoot and why? What works for you? Any tips?

Anything you'd like to share will be great help.
_________________
I've got too much energy to switch off my mind. But not enough to get myself organized! -theThe

Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:57 pm Post subject:

I shoot JPEG. Its easy, its simple and it works for me. Why ask the poll question then? I'm thinking I need to switch to RAW. Why? "Because all the cool kids are doin it!"

Actually the more I read and talk with people, RAW is seeming to be a much better file format. Granted, I think its a pain in the behind to work with, I'll make that clear. But it does seem to offer so much more if you are willing to put in the extra work. (and maybe its not really extra work once you get used to it)

I saw a presentation by a PRO who uses the phrase, "you can't polish a turd" when describing why he felt there was no reason to shoot JPEG. With the compression of the file, you can't "fix" problems as easily as you can with the RAW file.

I suppose it has to do with your comfort level and work flow. RAW files will take up much more space per file no matter what the megapixel, so naturally the larger the megapixel camera like Canon's new 21 mpx those files are going to be huge so the need for very large or very many memory cards now exists. Then hard drive storage for you computer is probably the next thing.

Anyway, those are my thoughts for now... looking forward to reading yours.
_________________
I've got too much energy to switch off my mind. But not enough to get myself organized! -theThe

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:52 am Post subject:

Ugh, since I don't have a cool camera I didn't answer the poll.... but I am tired of new better things making my computer seem obsolete. I will do my very best to stay JPEG as long as I can possibly stand it:)
_________________
A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wits and add drama to an otherwise dull day. - Calvin

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:20 am Post subject:

RAW all the way. I used to hate having to 'process' the RAW files to be able to use them. Then I saw the light. Or should I say LightRoom. It provides fast processing of RAW files in bulk. I can do all of my simple edits without ever opening PS - crop, exposure, white ballance, simple clones, B&W conversion, sharpen, color cast, and others. I was able to do an event last week of 600+ images in about 3.5 hours of post. If I was still using Bridge, that would have taken me about 2 days. Even had I shot this in JPEG, I would have spent that 3.5 hours in post. Why not have the best quality available to me.

I did however, recently purchase an external hard drive. A 1 TB drive for $168 should do me for a couple of weeks.

_________________
I plan on living forever. So far so good...

Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:38 pm Post subject:

I actually shoot Raw+JPEG alot. Echo Jim on Lightroom (I know where he got it). It makes batch processing easier. But by shooting both, I have jpeg if I need a quick unprocessed turnaround. Anything I'm going to put my name on though I want to be able to correct.

A couple of years ago I got the chance to go to Europe as a chaporone for my sisters French class. A once in a lifetime opportunity, and I shot everything in jpeg because of space. I had set my white balance for inside Notre Dame, and then somewhere along the line, my white balance accidently got knocked back to that setting. I had hundreds of pictures shot with the wrong white balance, which meant many hours of PS color correction of jpegs. They never quite look right and of course you have image degradation.

That convinced me that anything important must be shot in RAW.
_________________
"Cinderella Story. Outta nowhere. A former greenskeeper, now about to become the Masters champion. It looks like a mirac.....It's in the hole! It's in the hole! It's in the hole!"

Joined: 22 Feb 2007 Posts: 424

I love shooting in RAW but I take a lot of shots and it's starting to bug me to PSE every shot. I'll have to check into Lightroom - sounds like it would make working with RAW so much easier!

Smile

Amy

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:36 am Post subject:

I wish there was a class on this or something... I know a little about RAW but it's only just enough to know that I'm definitely interested in making the switch from time to time (for the out-of-the-ordinary, non-everyday photos) I take.

I'm a kinetic learner though, so I'm not one of those who can just read about something and have that little lightbulb go off in my brain. I need to actually SEE it in action, ya know?

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 11:33 am Post subject:

Joined: 04 Mar 2007 Posts: 117 Location: Delaware, Ohio

The only thing I don't like about RAW is that I'm paying for a killer camera that adds a lot of great corrections to the file as I shoot. Shooting in RAW bypasses all of that. There are many times I just haven't been able to get my Raw file to look as good as its jpg version....
_________________

Photoshop the World!

http://ensignarts.blogspot.com/

Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:45 am Post subject:

That surprises me coming from you. I thought you would have made all of your favorite profiles for how youlike images to look and have them saved in ACR, DPP or I guess you probably use Capture NX2.
_________________
I plan on living forever. So far so good...

Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:09 am Post subject:

Now I'm going to have to look. I have been shooting in RAW for the last couple weeks. Hadn't considered that the jpeg version might be better from the start.

My feeling today (and I only mention it so you all can explain why I am right or wrong or even why I feel the way I do) is RAW is cool when the picture is horrible. Got some great results (for me...lol) at fixing sodium lights in a gym and fixing bulb lighting in my house after dark. But when shooting outdoors or in a well lit situation I don't really see the purpose. Just seems like a bunch of extra steps slowing down my editing process. And since I am not a pro, I'm probably spending way too much time editing as it is.

I am thinking my plan going forward maybe to do the RAW thing when confronted by snow, or gym lights, or taking LO pictures at home after dark. And go back to jpeg the rest of the time?
_________________
A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wits and add drama to an otherwise dull day. - Calvin

Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:51 am Post subject:

That is a decent plan. For 90% of what I do, JPEG would be fine. However, LightRoom makes the conversion process superfluous. The only tme I actually convert to JPG is to upload to web or send to a printer. Otherwise everything stays in .CR2 fomat.
_________________
I plan on living forever. So far so good...

Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:46 am Post subject:

And see, there is a portion of my point about not liking RAW files... .jpeg is fine for most of the time and for most of the people that use it!

I get that RAW is better for file editing etc, but either I shoot them right in camera (which I seriously doubt) or I just don't need a lot of corrections from what the camera is actually doing.

$%^#$%^ RAW vs. JPEG, its just too frustrating! But I did see in Pop Photo there is an article about how you should shoot in RAW all the time and that PSE 7.0 can now handle all RAW file formats.

Oh well... all good info I guess.
_________________
I've got too much energy to switch off my mind. But not enough to get myself organized! -theThe