RAW versus Jpeg

[PhotoXopher]

you know what, people ***** about stuff on this forum all the time, so get over it..

Help solve the problem, move on - or better yet, post something useful to the thread.

Microsoft Pro Photo Tools, free for anyone interested that hasn't tried it yet.
http://www.microsoft.com/prophoto/downloads/tools.aspx

 

[robertwsimpson]

that article is very interesting! the bullet points are very informative, if you don't want to read the whole thing, at least check those out.

 

[thenikonguy]

I'm just letting you know that guys who do this, it makes them look like pricks.

Just saying....

if telling people to try makes me a prick, then I am the biggest prick in the world

 

[Goontz]

that article is very interesting! the bullet points are very informative, if you don't want to read the whole thing, at least check those out.

Agreed. Good article, N0YZE.

 

[bp4life71]

:hug::

 

[Samanax]

Alot of incite here. Thats why I like these forums. I can edit my photos as a jpeg, just as well as a raw. So I still dont see a real reason as a "hobbyist" to shoot in Raw.....but I suppose for the professional it would give a possible advantage.

I'm strickly a hobbyiest that started about a year and a half ago with a Canon XTi and I only shoot in RAW. The reason for this is I was never really happy with the JPEG images that I was getting out of my XTi...they seemed really soft and I didn't like the way the colors were coming out...I tried all the different Picture Styles and wasn't happy with any of them, even after editing them with Digital Photo Professional or Photoshop Elements 6.

Then some of the more experienced local Canon shooters told me I should try shooting in RAW and I'm glad they did. There was a huge difference in the way the images came out...the RAW images were a lot sharper and had much better color, detail and clarity than any of my previous JPEG images. Wish I started shooting in RAW earlier. I haven't shot in JPEG since.

You could try shooting a scene using the highest JPEG quality setting and then shoot the same scene in RAW and then edit both images and compare. Then decide which you would prefer to shoot in.

You might also want to check out the information in the following links.

RAW File Format

DPS: RAW vs JPEG

RAW vs JPEG: A Visual Comparison

Raw vs JPEG Experiment

RAW vs JPEG

 

[PhotoXopher]

Hopefully it helps, I have it bookmarked myself so I can go back to it - it's a lot to read but worth it if this is an issue that you want to make an educated decision on.

 

[robertwsimpson]

I'm just letting you know that guys who do this, it makes them look like pricks.

Just saying....

if telling people to try makes me a prick, then I am the biggest prick in the world

Now there's something to be proud of.

 

[robertwsimpson]

Alot of incite here. Thats why I like these forums. I can edit my photos as a jpeg, just as well as a raw. So I still dont see a real reason as a "hobbyist" to shoot in Raw.....but I suppose for the professional it would give a possible advantage.

I'm strickly a hobbyiest that started about a year and a half ago with a Canon XTi and I only shoot in RAW. The reason for this is I was never really happy with the JPEG images that I was getting out of my XTi...they seemed really soft and I didn't like the way the colors were coming out...I tried all the different Picture Styles and wasn't happy with any of them, even after editing them with Digital Photo Professional or Photoshop Elements 6.

Then some of the more experienced local Canon shooters told me I should try shooting in RAW and I'm glad they did. There was a huge difference in the way the images came out...the RAW images were a lot sharper and had much better color, detail and clarity than any of my previous JPEG images. Wish I started shooting in RAW earlier. I haven't shot in JPEG since.

You could try shooting a scene using the highest JPEG quality setting and then shoot the same scene in RAW and then edit both images and compare. Then decide which you would prefer to shoot in.

You might also want to check out the information in the following links.

RAW File Format

DPS: RAW vs JPEG

RAW vs JPEG: A Visual Comparison

Raw vs JPEG Experiment

RAW vs JPEG

I have the XTi also. I agree. In JPG, you can take some pretty good pictures, but, at least with this camera, if you want to take a great picture, you're pretty much going to have to shoot in RAW and then PP it.

 

[Village Idiot]

In RAW file you can’t see the images bigger when you film stripping the folder instead it will only show you as a big icon with the size of 1”x1 ½” while the JPEG are instantly viewable in a bigger image and yes through the LCD on your DSLR camera you can view it and see if you have the right exposure. Don’t tell me that in every event like sport, car racing etc. you still don’t know what setting your going to use?

I use Light Room 2 and PS CS4 with Bridge. I can see RAW thumbnails fine. The settings I use have nothing to do with why or why not I'm shooting RAW. Having an uncompressed, lossless file has everything to do with it. JPG images are compressed. Every time a JPEG is saved, it loses quality.

There’s nothing wrong if you mastering the right exposure/ingredients just to get the proper exposure when shooting JPEG mode. I know that the new generation some photographer are doing editing as well as enhancement for their works just to keep their images in a nice outcome... but, for me I don’t believe of doing that kind of process because you’re destroying the quality of your photos.

Joe McNally, Chase Jarvis, Vincnet Laforet, David Hobby, Zack Arias, Annie Leibovitz, Ansel Adams. All of these people edited their photos in one way or another. They're all amazing and famous/somewhat well known photographers. Today, if you're editing a RAW file, you're not losing any quality as the changes can be made and reverted.

If you’re a photographer in news paper and your work need it to be publish by tomorrow say the events is today and you have ½ hour gap to be printed your work and publish it by tomorrow, do you think that you have time to edit it? Editing is only for those who’s not in a rush situation and of course for your portfolios and other website competition just to show them how the images will come out if they are not in a rush. If I’m a news paper director then you’re going to show me your edited portfolio I’m not going to hire you as a pro photographer because I don’t want to delay my business for just giving me that kind of work (edited).

Every photographer has different opinions about how they going to do their work and how they going to present it.

Yes. I have greater control over how Light Room handles photos rather than my 5D MKII. Drop them in, select the export settings, and click a button. All photos are exported to the correct settings and sizes I want. So if you're shooting an event and have half an hour to send your photos in, are you going manually adjust the size of every 10-21mp image down to a usable size?

If you're a newspaper editor, you're not going to know how much editing went into my photos. And those that you think are edited may just be lit really well.

 

[o hey tyler]

I'm a go getter.. I hate laziness.. its deffinatley my biggest pet peve.. that and the word definitely .. becuase I can never remember how to spell it..

I used the search function of a little known search engine called google. The SUPER COOL thing about it is that it can check your spelling.

Also, Firefox has spell check.

 

[bp4life71]

I'm a go getter.. I hate laziness.. its deffinatley my biggest pet peve.. that and the word definitely .. becuase I can never remember how to spell it..

I can't resist.........

Google search it if you can't remember how to spell it!

 

[o hey tyler]

Neatsauce, I just said the exact same thing in the post right before yours.

 

[Goontz]

zomg, you also both have the same number of posts! BFFs! :greenpbl:

 

[o hey tyler]

zomg, you also both have the same number of posts! BFFs! :greenpbl:

omgomgomgomg. Yeah. And now we don't... Until he posts again.