RAW

upper · Oct 10, 2008

i think i read somewhere that if you take raw picture, its better than jpeg picture. is this true? i also read that you can change the exposure after the picture has been taken, how do you do this?

and side question, my camera, a XSI. after i snap a picture the screen shows busy for like 2-3 second, how am i suppose to shoot fast if this happens? i tried to take with low quality picture, i tried putting the shutter speed to the max, i have it on continious shoot mode thing.

thanks for the help.

Rachelsne · Oct 10, 2008

I recommend you read your manual. learn what each function does ad how to do it. If you dont have a manual go to the canon website and you will be able to view one on line from there.
then too look at shooting raw, Raw saves more information and doesnt degrade each time you open and edit it, It is much easier to adjust the wb on a raw photo and get back detail than on a JPG I love shooting raw.
When you take a picture with lots of information like shooting raw and then also doing a long exposure soemtimes it takes a while to send the info to the memory, but often in regular daylight settings with my canon I have no problem shooting RAW. (if you shoot small size its going to affect your print quality)

reg · Oct 10, 2008

Honestly, it's something that's better qualified with actual use. I've shot RAW since I got my camera, and *one* shot in just jpg and it was really frustrating. Just color and white balance tweaks and the couple of stops of latitude is nice. I've found that skies that are just that dull, washed-out white without being sharply blown out, can be toned down to a nice, natural blue. RAW's not going to fix a really poorly exposed image, but with jpg, your room for error is next to nothing.

I liken it almost to developing your own negs vs. Walmart 1 hour. Of course, you can manipulate a jpg in many ways still, or take multiple exposures to fully capture a scene but my point is that that extra amount of control is just a convenient little thing. And it can make the difference on a shot you don't have time to take and retake.

CameronDelray · Oct 11, 2008

(I don't mean to take over this guy's topic or anything, but I have a question sort of regarding this.)

Shooting in RAW, I know the White Balance doesn't affect it. What about the exposure? Setting exposure to -3, would that make a difference on the RAW photos? Also, if you change the WB and shoot in RAW, will the LCD screen show the image WITH the WB edits, or show it RAW?

Thanks.

Crazydad · Oct 11, 2008

upper said:
and side question, my camera, a XSI. after i snap a picture the screen shows busy for like 2-3 second, how am i suppose to shoot fast if this happens? i tried to take with low quality picture, i tried putting the shutter speed to the max, i have it on continious shoot mode thing.

I had the same issue with my D60 and I assume you are shooting jpeg. For rapid shooting, first thing is to make sure you have a fast memory card (high write speed). Next, I turn off the D-lighting (not sure what Canon calls it, auto lighting optimizer?) and the image review. The delay comes from the processor adjusting the lighting on each pic and then trying to display it.

Once I did those, I can burst a lot of shots in high quality.

tenlientl · Oct 11, 2008

CameronDelray said:
(I don't mean to take over this guy's topic or anything, but I have a question sort of regarding this.)

Shooting in RAW, I know the White Balance doesn't affect it. What about the exposure? Setting exposure to -3, would that make a difference on the RAW photos? Also, if you change the WB and shoot in RAW, will the LCD screen show the image WITH the WB edits, or show it RAW?

Thanks.

Yes. I too would like to know this. Wait. I think I've tested. And no, it doesnt o.o I think when you're bracketing, it does. Don't quote me on this. I'm still not sure what bracketing is for... or how to use it o.o

reg · Oct 11, 2008

CameronDelray said:
(I don't mean to take over this guy's topic or anything, but I have a question sort of regarding this.)

Shooting in RAW, I know the White Balance doesn't affect it. What about the exposure? Setting exposure to -3, would that make a difference on the RAW photos? Also, if you change the WB and shoot in RAW, will the LCD screen show the image WITH the WB edits, or show it RAW?

Thanks.

You definitely shouldn't make a habit of deliberately goofing the exposure. That's not a good idea. And as far as WB edits, well you can't see them on the LCD screen because you edit the WB in the computer, and the photo hasn't made it there yet.

Overread · Oct 11, 2008

CameronDelray said:
(I don't mean to take over this guy's topic or anything, but I have a question sort of regarding this.)

Shooting in RAW, I know the White Balance doesn't affect it. What about the exposure? Setting exposure to -3, would that make a difference on the RAW photos? Also, if you change the WB and shoot in RAW, will the LCD screen show the image WITH the WB edits, or show it RAW?

Thanks.

yes it does - using RAW does not mean that you can ignor makinga good exposure (if it did cameras would have no other setting

). Basically it gives you the ability to adjust the exposure within a range - which is determined by the shot itself, so if you horribly overexpose the image the details in the whites will not be captured - even in RAW you will not be able to get those details back - same also gose for underexposing. That said it is a very usefull buffer and safty net when a shot does stray a little too far one way or the other.

also note that I recomend people to only shift to RAW processing after they have a grasp of basic photo editing - since ALL RAW files need to be processed before they can be used - make sure things like sharpening, noise removal, white balance, levels, a smattering of curves are things that you can understand and do before moving to RAW. Also if you worry about quality then just shoot RAW+JPEG to start with - giving you quick and simple JPEGs to work with in the early days and RAWs to edit again once you understand them better

CameronDelray · Oct 11, 2008

Overread said:
yes it does - using RAW does not mean that you can ignor makinga good exposure (if it did cameras would have no other setting ). Basically it gives you the ability to adjust the exposure within a range - which is determined by the shot itself, so if you horribly overexpose the image the details in the whites will not be captured - even in RAW you will not be able to get those details back - same also gose for underexposing. That said it is a very usefull buffer and safty net when a shot does stray a little too far one way or the other.

also note that I recomend people to only shift to RAW processing after they have a grasp of basic photo editing - since ALL RAW files need to be processed before they can be used - make sure things like sharpening, noise removal, white balance, levels, a smattering of curves are things that you can understand and do before moving to RAW. Also if you worry about quality then just shoot RAW+JPEG to start with - giving you quick and simple JPEGs to work with in the early days and RAWs to edit again once you understand them better

Thanks. You hit the nail on the head there for my first question. I figured exposure still mattered, as I did some tests and they came out differently.

However, you didn't really answer my second question. I know all about PP and I have an understanding of photoshop and all the sharpening, levels, etc. Therefore, I prefer shooting RAW. The question I had was this: Say my White Balance is set to "Direct Sunlight". Say I am shooting in RAW. I know the WB won't have an affect on the photo once transferred to my computer. BUT, after I take the photo, will the LCD screen (in playback) display the RAW photos with the WB preset, or will my LCD screen show the RAW photo completely raw as it will show up exactly on my computer monitor after transferring?

ksmattfish · Oct 11, 2008

CameronDelray said:
...after I take the photo, will the LCD screen (in playback) display the RAW photos with the WB preset, or will my LCD screen show the RAW photo completely raw as it will show up exactly on my computer monitor after transferring?

Your camera shows a jpeg converted from the raw file. Raw files are not image files; they are data files. The data has to be converted into a jpg, tif, psd, gif, etc... to view the image. The jpeg the camera will display will be processed from the raw file as you have the picture style, parameters, wb, etc... set. This means the histogram you are looking at is also determined from the jpeg, and may not be 100% accurate to the raw file, particularly if you have changed saturation or contrast. I shoot raw, and normally keep my DSLRs set to as neutral as possible.

Depending on the raw processing software you use the raw files may come up on your computer for the first time with the in-camera processing intact, it may be displayed with the out-of-camera software's default settings, or it can be displayed with settings you have saved as a new default. For instance when I pull up a raw file in Canon DPP it initially applies the in-camera parameters I had set. When I use Adobe Camera Raw it applies my saved default settings.

ksmattfish · Oct 11, 2008

upper said:
i think i read somewhere that if you take raw picture, its better than jpeg picture. is this true? i also read that you can change the exposure after the picture has been taken, how do you do this?

A raw file is the data straight from the sensor, at least as much as possible. A jpeg is an image file that has be processed, and some data has been changed, compressed, and even discarded. The premise that a raw file is better than a jpeg is based on the idea that you have more options with the raw file. You can take all of the original data, use more sophisticated software than what's in-camera, and have more processing options (than with the in-camera software). For raw to actually be better than a jpeg you need to have access to the better software, and understand how to use it. If this isn't the case then jpeg may be the better choice. Most DSLRs have the option to shoot both at the same time if you want to try raw out. Many professionals and serious amateurs shoot jpeg; they are very accurate with their exposure, and are getting the processing they need from the in-camera software. On the other hand sharpen slider bars give me the willies! I can't live without my unsharp mask, and if I'm going to be in Photoshop anyway, I might as well do all the processing there.

Exposure can be changed in any photo. Raw processing software often has a slider or setting labeled exposure, but a jpeg can be lightened or darkened also. Raw may offer a bit more latitude and quality, but in general if you are lightening an image file you are probably increasing noise. I think the exposure latitude of jpegs is similar to slides; I want to be as accurate with exposure as possible, and anything off by more than 1/2 stop is going to be trouble. Raw may have almost a 1 stop latitude on the shadow side. With either file type any part of the photo that was exposed to be solid white is pretty much stuck solid white, but if you are careful you can use a technique called "expose to the right" with raw (see the link below).

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml

tsaraleksi · Oct 11, 2008

My experience has been that I'm a lot more comfortable in raw because I know I can fix an error if it happens (mainly w.r.t the white balance). However, jpeg can be really good if you need to dump a lot of files fast-- I shot a big event yesterday that needed images ~1 hour after it was over, I was able to select the images I wanted and crop, then save and have them on their way without having to do a conversion for every image, etc.

dEARlEADER · Oct 11, 2008

I also enjoy some vegetables RAW or with the accompaniment of a cold dip. It is a fact that RAW vegetables contain more nourishment verses their lossy cooked counterparts.

tenlientl · Oct 11, 2008

dEARlEADER said:
I also enjoy some vegetables RAW or with the accompaniment of a cold dip. It is a fact that RAW vegetables contain more nourishment verses their lossy cooked counterparts.

Nice... lol.

Anyways. I shoot in RAW when I got my first dSLR which was not even 3 weeks ago. I know how to play around, but I have no clue what I'm suppose to do. I just change it to the way I like it o.o I guess that's all that matters. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, right?