shooting raw

danir · Sep 16, 2007

two questions about raw images:

1. what are the advantages of shooting raw?
2. What do you need to convert raw images?

Thanks,
Dani.

abraxas · Sep 16, 2007

Some of the advantages I can think of are;

control over white balance
control over exposure

I also like working in 16 bit mode, I seem not to have the problems with haloing/separations that I have with .jpg.

I'm certain there are a zillion other advantages, but these are why I shoot nearly everything in RAW.

I pick 'em up with CS2. Don't know how it works, just does.

-Hope you get more responses than this

.

confucious · Sep 16, 2007

I have been shooting with my Canon XTI for a very short time but it only took me about 2 weeks before I realized the advantages of RAW. NOw I shoot everything in RAW and JPEG, or just RAW if I don't have much room on my card.

Advantages are basically what the above poster said: the ability to tinker with all the curves and balances, adjust shot settings AFTER the shot (IE: if you forgot to change it from "fluorescents" to "sun" you can do so after), decrease noise, contrast etc etc. Basically, RAW is the complete package of information your shot captured BEFORE it is converted into JPEG format. This is important as the image actually loses information in the conversion process.

I use the editing software that came with my Camera and it does me fine. Though I may look around for a more comprehensive one.

GOod luck!

danir · Sep 17, 2007

Thanks for the replies.
Does anyone know if Gimp can handle raw images?

Dani

Garbz · Sep 17, 2007

No it can't as far as I know.

Big Mike · Sep 17, 2007

Good article Why RAW

sabbath999 · Sep 17, 2007

This topic REALLY needs to be a sticky.

jols · Sep 17, 2007

picasa is the pro i use to convert raw to jpeg.

its a free download and you can mess about your pics on there as well

Jon, The Elder · Sep 17, 2007

Yes it should be a sticky, but Big Mike is convinced they are not used to any great degree.

elsaspet · Sep 17, 2007

YOU SHOULD ALWAYS SHOOT RAW.
No reason not to, and every reason in the world to do it.

JHF Photography · Sep 17, 2007

A great program for processing RAW images is Adobe Lightroom. The beauty of the program is it allows you to make all the changes of a RAW convertor, except that it doesn't touch the original file. It saves the changes as instructions, so when you view the image it knows what to display back to you. But none of the changes are permanent or file altering, until you export the file. Even then, the RAW file remains untouched, the program just creates a new copy of the image in whatever file format you chose to export as (jpg, tiff, psd, etc.).

It also integrates well with Photoshop, allowing you to open the image in photoshop, make your detailed edits there, then when you save it saves back into lightroom for catalouging the pictures.

To top it all off, it is a great tool for organizing and catalouging your pics... lot's of options for sorting and ranking pictures and applying keywording.

Now, it does depend on the type of editing you're looking at doing. Lightroom is capable of a lot, it makes a great RAW convertor, and you can change a lot of the basic things such as white balance, exposure, levels, etc. What it can't really do is pixel level editing, which is where photoshop (or some other editing program) comes in.

Myself, I'm currently using Lightroom for almost all of my editing and conversions. If I need to do further work, I have Photoshop Elements, which is a fairly capable program too.

Hope this info helps.... if you want any clarification of anything, just ask.

danir · Sep 17, 2007

Thanks for the replies.

Big Mike, this article is great help. Thanks.

I'm trying not to buy any editing software yet so I'm currently using Gimp. I might try picasa if it handles raw images better.

Dani.

Big Mike · Sep 17, 2007

Your camera will have come with software for editing/converting RAW files.

JHF Photography · Sep 17, 2007

danir said:
I'm trying not to buy any editing software yet so I'm currently using Gimp. I might try picasa if it handles raw images better.
Dani.

Oops.... sorry about that. Misread your question a bit and got carried away. The simple answer to your second question is to convert RAW images you need a RAW convertor....

sabbath999 · Sep 17, 2007

elsaspet said:
YOU SHOULD ALWAYS SHOOT RAW.
No reason not to, and every reason in the world to do it.

Ummm, there are LOTS of reasons to not shoot raw...

Media people often shoot jpeg because speed of workflow (and keeping your workflow as quick as possible) is more important than the benefits of raw. After all, most press images are used quickly, once, and then forgotten about.

I virtually never shoot RAW simply because of the number of images I shoot, and the fact that my images are shot to appear online where resolution doesn't matter very much anyway.

If you are a wedding and portrait photographer, or an art photographer, I can see your point... but when I go out and shoot high school football for the local paper, take 400 or so different images (which will be converted to black and white) and have exactly 2 hours after the end of the game to have them sorted, cropped, adjusted, the players and plays identified for the cutlines and then on to editorial so they can make the morning edition... RAW is simply a waste of time, space and energy.