Shooting RAW...

meggs23 · Jun 21, 2011

So I am a major noob - going to put that out there. Now the big question - should I be shooting in RAW or should I wait until I am more comfortable with my camera and learn a little more about it? Or should I just jump in feet first and hope for the best. I know with RAW I get to control more of how it comes out, whereas JPEG - the camera decides more of where things need to be.

Kerbouchard · Jun 22, 2011

How about RAW +JPEG...that way, you get the instant gratification, and if you want to come back and edit a photo that you really like once you have some post processing experience, you can do so...

Bo4key · Jun 22, 2011

I shot in JPEG for about a week and then asked myself "what am I doing?"

I've shot RAW ever since, but I guess it just depends on how much control and work you want with each of your shots. Keep in mind, each shot in RAW has to have at least some post processing for posting on the web and printing. Even if you are just using your bundled software to convert to JPEG.

and, what they ^^^^ said.

ariel_ · Jun 22, 2011

meggs23 said:
I know with RAW I get to control more of how it comes out, whereas JPEG - the camera decides more of where things need to be.

I personally just started shooting RAW. I'm not sure what you mean by "JPEG - the camera decides more of where things need to be". If your shooting in Manual mode you have full control of all the settings. If you shoot in Aperture or Shutter Priority, two of the exposure triangle is set by the camera one of them usually being the ISO. From my understanding shooting RAW allows you greater flexibility in post production than JPEG.

Bo4key · Jun 22, 2011

JPEG compresses the image in camera. Therefore, it takes out a lot of the information in the file itself. It doesn't really have anything to do with how you are shooting the photo.

fudsylow · Jun 22, 2011

I once heard a very established photographer say this... "what's a Jpeg ? " hehehe..... his point was that you should capture in RAW. if you want to capture anything less, just buy a point and shoot, or use your camera phone... same result

leixialong · Jun 22, 2011

Bo4key said:
JPEG compresses the image in camera. Therefore, it takes out a lot of the information in the file itself. It doesn't really have anything to do with how you are shooting the photo.

On the money with that explanation mate.

meggs23 · Jun 22, 2011

ariel_ said:
I personally just started shooting RAW. I'm not sure what you mean by "JPEG - the camera decides more of where things need to be". If your shooting in Manual mode you have full control of all the settings. If you shoot in Aperture or Shutter Priority, two of the exposure triangle is set by the camera one of them usually being the ISO. From my understanding shooting RAW allows you greater flexibility in post production than JPEG.

What I meant is more flexibility in the editing - not flexibility in taking the photo.

WesternGuy · Jun 22, 2011

I would definitely go for it. If you are a little leary at first, then the recommendation of Kerbouchard to shoot RAW + JPEG is a good one. I started out shooting only JPEG and then went to RAW+JPEG and decided that was really a waste of memory card and hard drive space...went to RAW only and have never looked back. The only regret I have is not starting with RAW sooner. I believe you will be absolutely amazed at the detail that you can extract from a RAW file and the freedom that it gives you in the editing process.

Cheers,

WesternGuy

480sparky · Jun 22, 2011

WesternGuy said:
............ The only regret I have is not starting with RAW sooner.............

X2. To the power of infinity. Plus 1.

I shot Jpeg for about 2 years. I kicked myself for not learning about RAW sooner. I look at my early work and say, "Damn... if only I had known!"

If the film analogy of a negative applies to a RAW file, then the film equivalent of a Jpeg is a Polaroid instant print.... there just isn't much you can do with a Polaroid.

I generally shoot RAW + Jpeg so I have the Jpegs for 'instant upload' for posting, email, etc.

Kerbouchard · Jun 22, 2011

ariel_ said:
meggs23 said:

I know with RAW I get to control more of how it comes out, whereas JPEG - the camera decides more of where things need to be.

Click to expand...

I personally just started shooting RAW. I'm not sure what you mean by "JPEG - the camera decides more of where things need to be". If your shooting in Manual mode you have full control of all the settings. If you shoot in Aperture or Shutter Priority, two of the exposure triangle is set by the camera one of them usually being the ISO. From my understanding shooting RAW allows you greater flexibility in post production than JPEG.

Most edits that can be done with a RAW file can also be done with a JPEG. There is one major difference, though. When editing a jpeg file, just about anything you do to it is what is called a 'destructive edit'. In other words, it destroys/degrades/or removes original data. For instance, you can adjust the white balance of a JPEG file, but since the data has already been encoded, the edit is destructive by nature.

In RAW editing, the White Balance has not been applied to the original data, yet. You can pick whatever you want and it will be applied to the original data. This is a non destructive edit.

Whether shooting JPEG or RAW, the camera records the same data that is coming from the sensor. In JPEG mode, it then takes your picture control settings, white balance settings, etc and converts that data to a picture file and compresses the data that is not needed for it's output. In RAW mode, it saves all the data and lets you decide how to process it at a later date. For instance, in JPEG mode, your sharpening settings, or your vivid settings, or whatever settings determine your final output. When shooting RAW, you always go back to the original data and pick all new settings.

There are two other benefits that can probably be lumped into one. Over the next few years, you will probably become more skilled at post processing, which will allow you to revisit some of your early images and get a lot more out of them or reprocess them according to whatever style you develop. On the other side of the same coin, software is becoming better and better about getting the most out of a RAW file. Photoshop CS5 can do things that most people never even dreamed about 10 years ago and with the next generation of computers and software coupled with the experience that you gain over the next few years, having the original RAW files could be a huge benefit.

Plus, storage is cheap...

KenC · Jun 22, 2011

Shoot RAW and if you're not sure about settings during the conversion (either in the software that came with your camera, or ACR in PS) you can do multiple conversions and see which you like better. At worst, if you don't see the need to make any changes when converting, you will end up with something like the OOC jpg you are getting now, but you will prevent the camera from compressing the file (provided you convert to a tiff file, not a jpg - you should go with tiff for any image you're serious about).

NikonME · Jun 22, 2011

I do not shoot in the RAW anymore. At first my wife wasn't really happy with the idea, but once I was arrested for public indecency I decided to shoot fully clothed from that point on.