jtiggatrost
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2013
- Messages
- 34
- Reaction score
- 0
Is it better to be in RAW format or JPEG format, if I don't edit my videos visual content such as color, contrast, etc.?
What is the best video format to shoot in?
- Thread Starter jtiggatrost
- Start date
jtiggatrost
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2013
- Messages
- 34
- Reaction score
- 0
- Thread Starter 🔹
- #3
Alright thank you
brunerww
No longer a newbie, moving up!
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2012
- Messages
- 660
- Reaction score
- 59
- Location
- North America
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
Hi jtiggatrost - Some modern video cameras do offer you the choice between uncompressed (or "RAW") and compressed formats. These compressed formats are generally called video "codecs". The most common codec for DSL cameras is some variation of h.264 - either Quicktime (.MOV) for Canon and Panasonic or AVCHD (.MTS) for Panasonic and Sony.
One camera, the Panasonic GH3, records to your choice of either Quicktime or AVCHD.
Everyone shooting digital in Hollywood shoots RAW, but, as of now, only one video camera below $2000 can shoot uncompressed RAW straight from the factory - the $1995 Blackmagic Cinema Camera.
Below $1000, the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera will have the ability to shoot 'lightly' compressed CinemaDNG RAW in the future with a factory upgrade. In the meantime, it records to a codec called ProRes - which is far less compressed than the h.264 codecs, but, at 233mbps, it still sucks up a lot of memory.
And some Canon cameras (to include the 7D) can shoot RAW with a third party firmware modification from Magic Lantern.
RAW does allow for extensive color and image manipulation without degradation - but at the expense of huge storage requirements and complicated workflows.
For most people, my guess is that it is not worth it. But, as in still photography, some professionals and enthusiasts will shoot RAW exclusively, and will wonder "how anybody can put up with h.264" (said with a sneer
).
On the other hand, the majority of hobbyists and consumers either won't bother with RAW, or won't know what it is - and their videos will turn out just fine.
Cheers,
Bill
One camera, the Panasonic GH3, records to your choice of either Quicktime or AVCHD.
Everyone shooting digital in Hollywood shoots RAW, but, as of now, only one video camera below $2000 can shoot uncompressed RAW straight from the factory - the $1995 Blackmagic Cinema Camera.
Below $1000, the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera will have the ability to shoot 'lightly' compressed CinemaDNG RAW in the future with a factory upgrade. In the meantime, it records to a codec called ProRes - which is far less compressed than the h.264 codecs, but, at 233mbps, it still sucks up a lot of memory.
And some Canon cameras (to include the 7D) can shoot RAW with a third party firmware modification from Magic Lantern.
RAW does allow for extensive color and image manipulation without degradation - but at the expense of huge storage requirements and complicated workflows.
For most people, my guess is that it is not worth it. But, as in still photography, some professionals and enthusiasts will shoot RAW exclusively, and will wonder "how anybody can put up with h.264" (said with a sneer
).On the other hand, the majority of hobbyists and consumers either won't bother with RAW, or won't know what it is - and their videos will turn out just fine.
Cheers,
Bill
Last edited:
Similar threads
