RAW files.

[_Onlettinggo]

I got a Canon Xsi bought but it is being shipped to my house, I was just wondering in advance whether I should shoot in RAW or not? And If I do shoot in RAW how would I benefit and can I put those images into GIMP ? And if not then can someone link me to an add-on for it? Thanks

 

[IgsEMT]

Dear Friend,
RAW vs JPG is a debate similar to Nikon vs Canon.
The power is in your hands.
If you have a calibrated monitor and you are willing to sit and process each image then shoot RAW, get your self an 8gig card and shoot away. If you don't have calibrated monitor, you don't have time to play, and you just want "what you see is what you get type" then shoot JPG.
Until few months ago I was shooting JPGs non stop. I adjust everything in camera and shoot, no problem. When my son was born and I had to give camera to other people to shoot, I switched it to RAW. I've yet to go back to JPGs b/c on daily bases b/n me (who knows the camera) and my wife (who has a great eye for details but doesn't want to learn settings) we bangout about 20-30 frames on our kids around the house. When it comes time for repairs (mostly exposures) it is easier to do so in RAW then in JPG.
GiMP.
I am not sure if gimp has RAW processing abilities.
Alternatively, there are number of programs out there, picassa, photoshop, lightroom, aperture. There's a canon program, don't know the name of it, also very good.

For me, RAW processing is more suitable on manufacturer's software. For my Nikons I use Capture. What I see in camera is what I get on the screen. I've yet to figure out how to do that with LR and PS (no time to learn that part - once I will though, my workflow will speedup).


There are advantages to both and disadvantages to both, only you can say what flavor you like to shoot.

 

[Garbz]

UFRAW is the plugin you'll need for GIMP to work. A quick google on the name will bring you straight to the website

 

[lbridges]

RAW vice JPG...IMO, it depends on how many, and what kind of images you take - and that might vary from day to day. That, and really how much time you invest in them after the shot is taken.

If you are as prolific as a wedding photographer (1K+ images a day), you will likely want to learn how to best use the in-camera jpg mode or hire on someone to do post processing for you while you continue shooting. And jpg does allow for longer shot bursts if you're trying to capture something needing that sort of imaging (sports). I don't use it in my style of shooting, but I think the limit before the buffer fills on my 50D (at 6.3 fps) is like 19 frames in RAW and over 200 in jpg. In that case you can see the choice is to capture 3 or 4 seconds of images, or capture 30 seconds.

In most if not all other cases RAW is the way to go. I may not be saying this technically correct, but I see it as the RAW format allows you more effective dynamic range. For an example, lets say in some photograph you wanted to try and figure out what something was, something that's almost lost in the shadows. Once an image is in jpg mode, don't plan to pull up more shadow detail as the compression routine has cut off "data". But in RAW mode the data may still be still there (depending on exposure).

Using the Canon supplied software (DPP) you can always do a batch conversion from RAW to jpg - helpful to correct camera errors in assumed white balance, etc.

 

[Big Mike]

Why Raw -- Part I

 

[_Onlettinggo]

Alright awesome. RAW seems like the file type for me, I just gotta get a bigger card. Thanks everyone.

 

[bhphotography]

I shoot raw + jpeg. I use jpeg for quick previews and raw for full editing. Shooting weddings means that my exposure might not always be perfect. A quick 180 degree turn to capture a spontaneous moment might change the light significantly. Shooting in studio I'm ok using jpeg only, however I do like to work with the raw for the most part.