Moving from jpeg to raw!

[C.Lloyd]

.....
With regards to the file size limit. FEAR IT! If you fear filling your card then you start thinking about your photos, thinking about how you are shooting and you may go home with 100 / 200 good photos rather than 100 / 700. I would always prefer putting on my wall a hand full of killer shots rather than 100 mediocre ones.

.....Thanks for the tip on the mem card, I would hate to have that in my mind when shooting, but dont think Im going to hit that wall, but if I do, then I will be pissed and need to get another Card.

I think you missed the point of Garbz comment... he wasn't saying "you better get another card so you can fire off 1000 shots and don't have to worry about using all your available memory", he was saying "if you know that your memory is limited, you won't just fire off 1000 shots and get 100 good ones. You'll think before you shoot, and get 100 good ones out of 200 shots".

 

[goodoneian]

i've shot nothing but raw since the beginning of 09 and i already have 25 gigs of pictures D:

that might not be a lot for some people but for me it sure is

as garbz stated, fortunately hard drives are pretty cheap these days

 

[tjdphotos]

I think you missed the point of Garbz comment... he wasn't saying "you better get another card so you can fire off 1000 shots and don't have to worry about using all your available memory", he was saying "if you know that your memory is limited, you won't just fire off 1000 shots and get 100 good ones. You'll think before you shoot, and get 100 good ones out of 200 shots".

No, I understood Garbz point, but for this shoot I'm not going to even worry about it, i but I should get another card, how many Raws can I fit on a 2g card? I just need 2 great ones, the rest is gravy.

 

[JerryPH]

i've shot nothing but raw since the beginning of 09 and i already have 25 gigs of pictures D:

that might not be a lot for some people but for me it sure is

as garbz stated, fortunately hard drives are pretty cheap these days

I have something over 2 terrabytes in RAW files. By having a good workflow, I have a minimum of 3 copies of all my work (more than 6 terrabyes right there).

Not just the cost of had drives, but fast storage cards for our cameras are dropping like flies. When I first got my D200, an 8GB Extreme IV CF card was $350. today I looked and I can get a *16GB* SanDisk Extreme IV for UNDER $100 (my next purchase is two 16GB cards).

Good times in a way!

 

[tjdphotos]

My moving from JPEG to RAW project result can be found Here or by cutting and pasting Kildrifter at Crunchy Frog - photography by tjdphotography.com - Green Bay WI - Terry John Dewey into your browser. I never hit the wall but came damn close with 210 Raw Images +1.99g on a 2gig card, The post processing was cumbersome to say the least but my attention to detail was up as I adjusted and coverted each of the images to jpeg. A good overall first time experience! Thanks for all the advice!

~peace tjd!

 

[brileyphotog]

Perhaps I'm the only one left (since everyone on TPF seems to have hard-ons for RAW), but I still say that if you shot a JPEG correctly that it should be virtually indistinguishable from RAW, which you'll have to convert later anyway.

IMHO RAW just lets you save blown (by which I mean, screwed up) photos 99% of the time.

Not that I know anything.

 

[Overread]

IT depends - remember that JPEGs also have contrast, noise, sharpening and (most importantly) white balance all set by the camera when you take the shot.
Now the noise and sharpening in the camera is applied to the whole shot - whilst if you shoot and process RAW you determin the areas that get the process applied - backgrounds tend to need noise removal, but don't need sharpening - the opposite is true of the main subject. Further noise removal and sharpening programs in editing software on computers is generaly more powerful than those in the camera - so you can get a much better overall result. Its unnotiable if all your doing is posting 1000pixel resized images to the net, but its very noticable when it comes to printing or larger backgrounds for your computer (note that in printing its more the sharpness since noise tends to hardly show up at all in prints).

White balance is the big thing for RAW though - whilst one can edit this in JPEGs its much more tricky if you mess it up completly and - further even if its small changes its still harder to get it to look right. RAW lets you set it how you want it and that is a very powerfull editing tool

And finally yes RAW lets you get a slightly greater dynamic range out of your shots - so you have greater chance of reducing the chances of a blownout area = a blownout area can never be saved in editing since it only has white as data - no details. (same goes for a black underexposed area).

 

[tsaraleksi]

Raw just gives you a lot more control-- sure you can get it 'right' in the cam but if you shot in raw, you can do what you want later. With the price of memory collapsing, why not give yourself the maximum control and quality. If you're shooting on a tight deadline, then sure, go jpeg, but to argue that people who are really talented don't need raw is just silly.

 

[JerryPH]

Yeah tjdphotos my comment wasn't really targeted at you but at the suggestions others are making.

Is that really a valid concern these days where a WD 1TB Harddrives are $108? You could fit 62500 10megapixels RAW files onto that drive.
Or just do what I do, process the RAWs and then archive the finished JPEGs.

Not only that, but the quality differences between working on a 16-bit file before making that 8-bit JPG, the quality differences are incredible, especially if you do even the smallest amount of post processing.

As a professional, if someone is paying you for a picture, it is the responsibility of the photographer to offer the highest quality results within the capabilities of their equipment... because *all* your competitors sure are. In today's market, there really are no reasons to shoot JPG only. Heck, I am not even a pro, and I don't even want to shoot 12-bit anymore... lol After I saw the nuances of difference between a 14-bit and a 12-bit RAW file, I shoot nothing but 14-bit RAWs now.

I recently had a chance to play with a fellow Nikon friend with a D3x... now THERE are some huge files! Over 75mb per RAW file, and he loves his 200-400mb TIFFs... lol Made my 25mb RAW files TEENY by comparison!

 

[tjdphotos]

As a professional, if someone is paying you for a picture, it is the responsibility of the photographer to offer the highest quality results within the capabilities of their equipment... because *all* your competitors sure are.

This is the main reason alone, not that I have competitors right now, but I do offer the images to the bands and if they want a print done I sure as hell don't want to be doing it via JPEG when I can be working from a file that contains the most information I'm capable of producing with my camera.

I did notice something tho, when after converting the CR2 file to Jpeg the size of the file Jpeg was considerably larger than an untouched Large 3888 x 2592 JPEG Untouched is around 3-4 m. A converted CR2 RAW to JPEG is 7.5 to 8.5 m Not sure Why any thoughts?
~ peace tjd

 

[JerryPH]

IMHO RAW just lets you save blown (by which I mean, screwed up) photos 99% of the time..

Hate to disappoint, but you will NEVER get the same results with a JPG that you will with RAW. Also, there are no generational losses with RAW, but are with JPG.

As far as getting the best out of the camera, we *ALL* do that, irrespective of file format, but you get an EASY 1-1.5 stops more range in a 12-bit RAW file than you ever will with a JPG. It's not just about saving blown out files (which when blown out, are blown out... RAW or JPG), its about being able to recover details that are impossible to recover in JPG and the gamut of colours used... its akin to looking at a 16 colour grey-scale picture vs a 256 colour grey scale... it is obvious, once you get your post processing down.

On top of that, if you want even more... shoot 14-bit UN-compressed RAW files if your camera can, that is the ultimate. I can tell the difference on my pics from the shadow and highlight details which ones were taken at this level vs JPG... there is just no comparison... yes, even on a 4X6 print from a cheap $100 HP printer!

 

[JerryPH]

I did notice something tho, when after converting the CR2 file to Jpeg the size of the file Jpeg was considerably larger than an untouched Large 3888 x 2592 JPEG Untouched is around 3-4 m. A converted CR2 RAW to JPEG is 7.5 to 8.5 m Not sure Why any thoughts?

What are you post processing with? If PS CS3/4 are you sure you are not importing a RAW file into 8-bit right off the bat? This is the default.

In essence, you are taking a RAW file, converting it to 8-bit RAW then converting it to 8-bit JPG versus taking a 16-bit raw file and converting THAT to an 8-bit JPG file.

 

[tjdphotos]

What are you post processing with? If PS CS3/4 are you sure you are not importing a RAW file into 8-bit right off the bat? This is the default.


In essence, you are taking a RAW file, converting it to 8-bit RAW then converting it to 8-bit JPG versus taking a 16-bit raw file and converting THAT to an 8-bit JPG file.

Post proccessing in camera raw 4.2 then opening to PS elements 6.0
Ok you lost me there. I think I may have come across the difference tho, in an original jpeg the resolution is 72dpi and RAW converted to JPEG 8 bit the resolution is 240 dpi

 

[m2v]

In fact, I am moving from RAW to JPEG after I feel confident with handling the camera settings of my D300. For me, RAW is a safer format because you can change settings later on without affecting the image quality as much as just adjusting on the jpeg.

 

[tjdphotos]

In fact, I am moving from RAW to JPEG after I feel confident with handling the camera settings of my D300. For me, RAW is a safer format because you can change settings later on without affecting the image quality as much as just adjusting on the jpeg.

A RAW File Image is never changed or affected by anything It will always remain the same as when you took it. You can adjust and save as a different file.