shooting raw?

[Buckster]

Yes, very similar to the difference between a .WAV and .MP3 audio file. Shooting in JPEG is a lot like recording something in MP3. It sounds fine but doesn't take heavy editing well.

Another analogy is ordering a sandwich at a restaurant. JPEG is the sandwich the waitress brings you. Raw is being able to take you sandwich back into the kitchen, change the wheat bread for rye, add some tomatoes, take off the sauce, pile more meat on, remove half the pickles......... and change your coffee to decaf.

I like that!

I've always seen them as raw being like a negative that can be used with darkroom equipment to make many different versions of a print, while a JPG is more like a Polaroid - what pops out of the camera is what you've got (for the most part), and accurate manipulation of it is very limited.

 

[TCampbell]

Unlike meats, poultry, seafood, shellfish, or eggs... viewing raw or undercooked images does not seem to increase your risk of illness. ;-)

 

[480sparky]

I like that!

I've always seen them as raw being like a negative that can be used with darkroom equipment to make many different versions of a print, while a JPG is more like a Polaroid - what pops out of the camera is what you've got (for the most part), and accurate manipulation of it is very limited.

I've used the same analogy as well:

JPEG:

Raw:

 

[480sparky]

Unlike meats, poultry, seafood, shellfish, or eggs... viewing raw or undercooked images does not seem to increase your risk of illness. ;-)

Yes it does.

I've contracted NAS.

 

[dmunsie]

Imho, shooting in .jpg is a great learning tool while you develop basic composition skills. I think once your eye starts to develop, it's time to start shooting raw. Because at that point you'll want to learn more about post processing. Since you're asking about it now, it's probably a good time to at least start shooting jpg+raw if your camera supports shooting both formats at the same time. That way you can archive the .raw versions for later and use the .jpg versions for quick viewing, printing, etc.

 

[table1349]

Let me google that for you

How do you do that?

Let me google that for you

 

[480sparky]

Let me google that for you

How do you do that?

Click here.

 

[aponi]

I dutifully shot in RAW because everyone said you should, but I didn't know what I was doing with it until I read a tutorial about it. You can really make a total mess with it if you're not careful.

 

[fsimcha]

1. I appreciate those who actually answered my Q, i did learn from each response...
2. You do not have to eat me up alive for breaking "forum rule #1" and asking a noob Q that has prob been asked before and looking like i havent heard of google before....
I am trying to learn a lot all at one time and did try looking up some information on raw but wanted to opinion of some other people who might be able to answer the Q in simple terms...

So, i guess that even though shooting raw is the more professional way to go, i am still learning how to use photoshop so i wouldnt really know how to properly edit a raw image anyways. I hope one day I will have a good enough handle of my camera in manual to be able to do all the rest too...

Thanks again......

 

[gregtallica]

1. I appreciate those who actually answered my Q, i did learn from each response...
2. You do not have to eat me up alive for breaking "forum rule #1" and asking a noob Q that has prob been asked before and looking like i havent heard of google before....
I am trying to learn a lot all at one time and did try looking up some information on raw but wanted to opinion of some other people who might be able to answer the Q in simple terms...

So, i guess that even though shooting raw is the more professional way to go, i am still learning how to use photoshop so i wouldnt really know how to properly edit a raw image anyways. I hope one day I will have a good enough handle of my camera in manual to be able to do all the rest too...

Thanks again......

Does your camera support Raw+JPEG? Why not shoot a few shots with that and try your hand at editing both. That way, you at least have a simple JPEG backup.

I don't think editing raw files can screw you up that badly.

 

[imagemaker46]

To the average eye it makes very little difference. Shooting in raw is overrated and not necessary for most photographers.

 

[Ballistics]

To the average eye it makes very little difference. Shooting in raw is overrated and not necessary for most photographers.

And the trap is set...

 

[CaptainNapalm]

Yes, very similar to the difference between a .WAV and .MP3 audio file. Shooting in JPEG is a lot like recording something in MP3. It sounds fine but doesn't take heavy editing well.

Another analogy is ordering a sandwich at a restaurant. JPEG is the sandwich the waitress brings you. Raw is being able to take you sandwich back into the kitchen, change the wheat bread for rye, add some tomatoes, take off the sauce, pile more meat on, remove half the pickles......... and change your coffee to decaf.

Haha. Very well put and true indeed.

 

[imagemaker46]

Yes, very similar to the difference between a .WAV and .MP3 audio file. Shooting in JPEG is a lot like recording something in MP3. It sounds fine but doesn't take heavy editing well.

Another analogy is ordering a sandwich at a restaurant. JPEG is the sandwich the waitress brings you. Raw is being able to take you sandwich back into the kitchen, change the wheat bread for rye, add some tomatoes, take off the sauce, pile more meat on, remove half the pickles......... and change your coffee to decaf.

I like that!

I've always seen them as raw being like a negative that can be used with darkroom equipment to make many different versions of a print, while a JPG is more like a Polaroid - what pops out of the camera is what you've got (for the most part), and accurate manipulation of it is very limited.

Guess the photographer better be skilled enough to get it right in camera then.

 

[480sparky]

Another analogy is ordering a sandwich at a restaurant. JPEG is the sandwich the waitress brings you. Raw is being able to take you sandwich back into the kitchen, change the wheat bread for rye, add some tomatoes, take off the sauce, pile more meat on, remove half the pickles......... and change your coffee to decaf.

I like that!

I've always seen them as raw being like a negative that can be used with darkroom equipment to make many different versions of a print, while a JPG is more like a Polaroid - what pops out of the camera is what you've got (for the most part), and accurate manipulation of it is very limited.

Guess the photographer better be skilled enough to get it right in camera then.

So you shoot with Polaroids then, huh?