About to start shooting in RAW (first time DSLR) also white balance questions.

[mainstang]

Ok so I have just started using a DSLR and would like to switch to shooting in RAW so that I can make sure an image is hopefully salvageable in PP. I usually like to go through an look at all my photos after taking them and pick a few favorites to work with or show friends. My question about raw is can I batch edit several photos with a set of parameters that should work for that particular scene ie. I was taking a lot of pictures during a short time with the same backdrop and I set white balance and other settings and say "apply to images 199-231" or do I have to adjust picture by picture. I'm happy with just a handful of good images out of the bunch but my wife will want all of the others to look like a JPEG to show friends.

Also I want to start set white balance. Starting out should I try to use the presets or should I try to set my white balance off a card. Could I use a piece of white cardstock to set white or do I need to buy a true card. Or is white balance something a should hold off until I try reforming/building other areas of my photography skill set.

Thanks in advance. I know there is a lot of questions.

 

[480sparky]

Ok so I have just started using a DSLR and would like to switch to shooting in RAW so that I can make sure an image is hopefully salvageable in PP. I usually like to go through an look at all my photos after taking them and pick a few favorites to work with or show friends. My question about raw is can I batch edit several photos with a set of parameters that should work for that particular scene ie. I was taking a lot of pictures during a short time with the same backdrop and I set white balance and other settings and say "apply to images 199-231" or do I have to adjust picture by picture. I'm happy with just a handful of good images out of the bunch but my wife will want all of the others to look like a JPEG to show friends.

As long as your lighting never changed, batch changing a group of photos will not be an issue.

Also I want to start set white balance. Starting out should I try to use the presets or should I try to set my white balance off a card. Could I use a piece of white cardstock to set white or do I need to buy a true card. Or is white balance something a should hold off until I try reforming/building other areas of my photography skill set.

Gray cards are super cheap.

 

[SCraig]

Ok so I have just started using a DSLR and would like to switch to shooting in RAW so that I can make sure an image is hopefully salvageable in PP. I usually like to go through an look at all my photos after taking them and pick a few favorites to work with or show friends. My question about raw is can I batch edit several photos with a set of parameters that should work for that particular scene ie. I was taking a lot of pictures during a short time with the same backdrop and I set white balance and other settings and say "apply to images 199-231" or do I have to adjust picture by picture. I'm happy with just a handful of good images out of the bunch but my wife will want all of the others to look like a JPEG to show friends.

It's going to vary with whatever software you are using. If the software is capable of doing batch processing or saving settings for use on multiple images, then yes you can. Most software can so you should be fine.

Also I want to start set white balance. Starting out should I try to use the presets or should I try to set my white balance off a card. Could I use a piece of white cardstock to set white or do I need to buy a true card. Or is white balance something a should hold off until I try reforming/building other areas of my photography skill set.

I use exactly two white balance settings: Auto or Custom. My camera is very good at picking the proper white balance, and it will do it for every shot. If I walk into the shade or clouds cover the sun or go from a room with incandescent lighting to a room with fluorescent lighting my camera picks the correct adjustment the majority of the time. If I change to a preset that isn't going to happen.

For a Custom WB I'll shoot a gray card. Like Sparky said, they are super cheap.

 

[480sparky]

Custom WB:

Auto WB:

Both are SOOC, merely reduced for posting.

 

[CouncilmanDoug]

you can easily change the wb with raw, so I don't really worry about it. I always shoot in the "sunny" white balance, and if I need too, which I rarely do, I just change it in post.

 

[slow231]

if you're shooting raw any WB setting can be achieved in post. I shoot mine in auto all of the time and don't waste time with greycards. everything i correct by eye in post, imo it gives me more flexibility especially in situations with different temp light (sunny window and indoor tungsten light). like someone already said most raw processing software can batch. so worst case i'll batch process the WB if it's off for any group of photos (with the same lighting of course). no biggie, and imo no more time than fiddling with a greycard.

i haven't heard any good reason as to why a raw shooter would mess with in-camera WB settings. the only think i can conceive of is a situation where you need quick previews or prints, but still, i would imagine a batch process would be just as easy and perhaps more adjustable/robust than fiddling with a greycard.

 

[rokvi]

Sometimes I don’t even use a "correct" WB. It all depends on what I'm shooting, I’ve found sometimes the correct WB is a little too cold for my liking, so I'll warm it up a little in PP and visa versa.

 

[slow231]

Sometimes I don’t even use a "correct" WB. It all depends on what I'm shooting, I’ve found sometimes the correct WB is a little too cold for my liking, so I'll warm it up a little in PP and visa versa.

yes exactly the point i was trying to get at about correcting by eye. i think it's just better to adjust to what you want the shot to look like in post ("correct" WB or not). and raw gives buys you the flexibility to change it to whatever you want (after the fact).

 

[mainstang]

So after reading a bit more on the Internet. Should I expect when opening the RAW file in say Photoshop or Gimp to look approximately the same as the jpeg but with just more leeway to PP if need be. Ie if I decided to shoot RAW should I expect to always have to adjust images to get to the look of the JPEGS the camera naturally puts out? I'm under standing that when opening RAW files the image will be washed out/unsharp?

 

[rokvi]

No with a raw file your getting the unprocessed picture and YOU decide what it needs eg: more contrast, WB adj, clarity, vibrance, saturation, sharpening etc. Basically all the things that the people in the east are deciding when they program your camera.

 

[sactown024]

You can make a preset in adobe Lightroom to make changes to all your photos, i have tons of presets (sharpening, vigetting, exposure,) pretty much one for everything I would ever want to do to a photo. I dont batch process them but you can if you want during "import".

 

[480sparky]

So after reading a bit more on the Internet. Should I expect when opening the RAW file in say Photoshop or Gimp to look approximately the same as the jpeg but with just more leeway to PP if need be. Ie if I decided to shoot RAW should I expect to always have to adjust images to get to the look of the JPEGS the camera naturally puts out? I'm under standing that when opening RAW files the image will be washed out/unsharp?

If you took a shot in raw + JPEG and brought them both up on your monitor side-by-side, they will look the same. There may be a difference if your editing software doesn't apply the in-camera settings to the raw image, but if you do that, they will be identical.

The beauty of raw lies in your editing options. All the settings of your camera have been applied to the JPEG (white balance, sharpness, saturation, etc.) and any data that wasn't used has been discarded. Raw files, however, has ALL the data your camera's sensor created in it's original form, and the camera settings are applied by the computer. Any data 'left over' is still intact, and you can change those settings whenever you want.

You camera may only have three options for a given setting (say, -1, 0 and +1 for saturation), but you may have hundreds of options (-5 through +5 in 0.1 steps) on your computer.

 

[KmH]

IIRC, Gimp can't show Raw image files.

If you shot in Raw+JPEG they will look totally different if displayed side-by-side with no additional editing.

This is the wrong reason to be shooting Raw -

shooting in RAW so that I can make sure an image is hopefully salvageable in PP

The goal is to get the image as close to what you want the final image to look like - in the camera.
The reason to use Raw is so you can 'finish' all the processing done in the camera. JPEG is intended as a 'finished, ready-to-print' file type and is not designed to allow much, if any, additional editing. with JPEG you give editing control to whatever committee of software engineers that wrote the JPEG conversion software you use.
Tutorials – The RAW File Format

Raw files have a lot more bit depth (possible colors) than JPEG files do, because JPEGs have already been edited in the camera, and about 80% of all the color information got thrown out.
Bit Depth
Image Types: JPEG & TIFF File Formats

As far as batch processing, that is going to depend on the software application you use and if the batch files are raw files or JPEG files.

 

[480sparky]

IIRC, Gimp can't show Raw image files.

Unless you install UFRaw.

If you shot in Raw+JPEG they will look totally different if displayed side-by-side with no additional editing.

Depends on the software, though. Some raw editors will apply the in-camera settings to the raw file, so a side-by-side comparison will show no differences.

This is the wrong reason to be shooting Raw -

shooting in RAW so that I can make sure an image is hopefully salvageable in PP

Agreed, unless you consider 'salvaging' meaning you took the shot with an incorrect settings (such as WB). Then you could 'salvage' the image in post.

The goal is to get the image as close to what you want the final image to look like - in the camera.

The camera is but one tool in one's arsenal. Use it to it's fullest potential. Same goes for all the tools you have... lenses, filters, flash, and yes........ software on your computer.

 

[mainstang]

I have an older version of adobe photoshop laying around somewhere and was curious as to if someone could tell me or lead me in the correct direction.

1. Is there a way to set PS to use the cameras settings that would have been applied to the JPEG to the RAW? I want to do PP but I want to start with something that looks close to jpeg and wont require too much tweaking?

2. If not a setting to allow camera's setting to apply, then a tutorial on how to do batch edits if it can be done on PS.

Basically is there a way to shoot in RAW and start off in photoshop (may look at getting lightroom) with an image that is close if not idenical to the jpeg and adjust from there?

Sorry I know it may be hard to give me the information without the PS edition that I have.
Also if it helps Im using a D3100