Is this the best format?

[Graci]

Greetings ~ I'm a newbie and need a little direction regarding digital photos taken by a professional photographer at my daughters 5/16 wedding.

Daughter hired a (unknown) photographer to take 6 hours of photos. They were promptly delivered on a disc unedited. We plan to edit (crop, sharpen, etc.) ourselves using a basic photoshop element software program.

My question #1 is: They were saved in JPEG file format and after reading many of these post, I'm not sure if this was the best format in order to make the best edits that we would like. Remember I'm a newbie & I'm confused as to what I need to communicate to the photographer so that I get the best format to edit possible. Or would a file format that takes tons of space even have been a possibility since she is not the person doing the editing.
Question #2: Does 300 x 480 sound like a decent dpi?

Do my questions make sense? Thanks in advance!!

-Graci

 

[B Kennedy]

300x400 sounds like pixels...and that is not very good at all...you at most might be able to print 4x6's out of them...and the editting will be tough with files that small...Jpegs would be fine for your editting, but you would need high resolution files

 

[Big Mike]

Receiving JPEG files from the photographer is not a problem. They should hopefully be taking the photos in RAW, but giving you JPEG should be OK.

As for the size of the images (in pixels)...you would want something more like 3000x4000 (or whatever)...but 300x400 is only good for viewing on a computer, not printing.

 

[B Kennedy]

Receiving JPEG files from the photographer is not a problem. They should hopefully be taking the photos in RAW, but giving you JPEG should be OK.

As for the size of the images (in pixels)...you would want something more like 3000x4000 (or whatever)...but 300x400 is only good for viewing on a computer, not printing.

most wedding photographers shoot raw as well as jpeg?

 

[PhotoXopher]

Sounds like the photographer gave you a disc of images for computer viewing only, not printing. My guess is they will require more money for the high res photos to print from once you pick which ones you want.

 

[Big Mike]

most wedding photographers shoot raw as well as jpeg?

Some do, but that is wasteful IMO.
But what many do; is shoot RAW then quickly make minor adjustments (or not) and output JPEG files.

Sounds like the photographer gave you a disc of images for computer viewing only, not printing. My guess is they will require more money for the high res photos to print from once you pick which ones you want.

That sounds like a likely scenario. Maybe there was a misunderstanding where the client thought they were getting full resolution files but the photographer was only offering files for viewing. Check the contract.

 

[musicaleCA]

I can see how RAW+JPEG would make lots of sense for a wedding, if you want to quickly get a projector out and do a slideshow of some shots that day on location.

I agree that it's probably a case of misunderstanding. Those are probably (I certainly hope, anyway) just shots for computer viewing for you to pick the ones you want.

 

[Graci]

I appreciate everyone's comments and suggestions. Turns out that I was indeed given the high resolution photos on disk - but many are disappointingly very 'grainy' and many seem under or over exposed. Thanks again for your comments.