Will RAW give me the abilities a JPEG does?

[SlimPaul]

Hey,

I know the title may sound stupid, since we all know that that RAW gives more flexibility, but I'll get to the point. I've been shooting RAW since I got my D90 but at some point I switched to JPEG because the images simply looked better to me and required less editing. I currently use either standard or vivid picture control and often set the d-lighting to extra high as it helps minimise blown out highlights. Now that I'm getting into more proffesional lenses, I started wondering if RAW would bring any advantages. Is it possible to apply my settings (extra high d-lighting, vivid) instantly using software?

Help appreciated,
Paul


Typed on my iPhone

 

[PhotoXopher]

Well that's kind of the thing... RAW does require more editing in general, but that's part of having 'full control'. What some people with Lightroom is figure out what settings/changes they like on most images and make it a custom setting they can use over and over again, or have it automatically apply when the images are downloaded from the camera.

 

[aerialphoto]

I switched to JPEG because the images simply looked better to me and required less editing.

If you use NX2 there shouldn't be any appreciable difference between the .JPG the camera generates and the .JPG NX2 generates - using the same settings. That includes active D-lighting. There shouldn't be any real need for any editing unless you want to.

Working on .nef files directly with Photoshop or Lightroom is a different story.

The massively huge advantage with working off raw .nef files is when you shoot in "vivid" and decide it actually looks pretty stupid when everything is oversaturated and contrasty. In that case you just switch the image to "normal" or "portrait" or something and everything changes - something you can't do with a .jpg without fiddling a lot and inevitably losing image data.

 

[robertwsimpson]

so you started shooting in RAW and then you dumbed down to shooting in JPG... I thought the whole point of a hobby was moving in the other direction... there's still hope though! go back to raw!

 

[PhotoXopher]

Whatever works best for you... you're not the only one with a DSLR shooting in JPG and happy with the results.

 

[itznfb]

so you started shooting in RAW and then you dumbed down to shooting in JPG... I thought the whole point of a hobby was moving in the other direction... there's still hope though! go back to raw!

With the built in software in the D90, D300s, D3x and D3s if you know what type of editing you want you can save a lot of time and shoot directly to .jpg with the processing already completed and saving a lot of space. Plus if you're not that great at post processing then the camera can probably do a much better job anyway.

 

[robertwsimpson]

to me, the point of a hobby is to get better at it... post processing is just one part of photography... I didn't agree with it at all at first, but now I am all about it... especially since I can't afford really nice lenses... it's another aspect of photography that you can practice at and get better and pick up little tips here and there... and you can post process on a rainy day.

 

[Derrel]

The newer Nikon cameras have 1,005 or 420 area RGB color information in their light metering, and have color-aware focusing, color aware light metering, and measure distance to the subject, and are from the company that invented multi-area, computer-analyzed light metering back in 1984 with the Nikon FA. Most other companies field entire lineups of cameras are color-blind,and can only measure simple reflectance values. Most other companies have d-slr bodies that do not have the automatic D-Lighting ability, which is in-camera tone mapping of the data, based on simple measurements like "oh, that big area is blue and is in to top sector and has interspersed bits of bright,irregularly shaped white objects and is at Infinity--that must be a blue sky with white clouds," and "small, round orb displaying at +10 EV over main exposure=bright sun in image, upper top left", and then measuring the entire bottom 3/4 of the frame as being EV 12 with lots of green grass a the bottom...along with two Caucasian heads, recognizable by computer simply due to their flesh tone RGB range readings, and the fact that the focus is locked on one of them with a left hand side AF point at 10 feet. TO a computer with a 100,000 + photo database, plus several really obvious clues like focus point and distance, green and blue expanses, this scene is a dead-simple one for a Nikon D90's computer to process.

When people who shoot color-blind cameras withiut D-Lighting image analysis and they flick you sh*+ about using in-camera JPEG's ability to color-analyze the data better than automatiic color print making machines were able to do over their 35 year development cycle, simply smile and continue enjoying the benefits of a very modern,advanced d-slr with a metering and image processing system that the other companies have been unable to figure out how to implement.

It's all quite simple,and it's why the very newest Nikon cameras have s many happy, satisfied customers. Better metering, with color awareness, and in-camera tone mapping of sensor data based on both reflectance and color and distance JPEG. This tech was invented by Nikon in 1984, had major upgrade by 1995 with the F5, and has been getting better rapidly since 2007. D-Lighting is in effect, "curves in photoshop", plus hand-done black point setting and white balance evaluation and contrast fine-tuning.

Older Nikon cameras do not produce the same types of OOC JPEGS however. So, to answer your question, NO a RAW will not necessarily give you the same type of image you can get from a directly made JPEG in your D90; unless you have a good deal of post processing skill, you very well might NOT be able to make a final image as good as the D90's advanced metering and D-Lighting can make. Why? Nikon's engineers know the sensor and the imaging system parameters very well,and the D90 has been designed to be sort of their ultimate amateur's d-slr camera. Like, with the Noise Reduction enabled, the D90 will determine how much NR is needed at varying ISO settings--you as an 'end user' might go overboard. Try shooting RAW + JPEG in extreme or critical situations, and see for yourself if you can do better with the RAW than the camera's JPEG processing software. Chances are, unless you're very skilled, the OOC image might look better.

 

[robertwsimpson]

I sense a Nikon vs Canon debate on the horizon.

 

[PhotoXopher]

Regardless, if Derrel ever writes a book I'm all over it...

 

[Sinister_kid]

so you started shooting in RAW and then you dumbed down to shooting in JPG... I thought the whole point of a hobby was moving in the other direction... there's still hope though! go back to raw!

to me, the point of a hobby is to get better at it... post processing is just one part of photography... I didn't agree with it at all at first, but now I am all about it... especially since I can't afford really nice lenses... it's another aspect of photography that you can practice at and get better and pick up little tips here and there... and you can post process on a rainy day.

You do know that professional photographers (ie. sports photographers) shoot in jpeg right?

 

[robertwsimpson]

so you started shooting in RAW and then you dumbed down to shooting in JPG... I thought the whole point of a hobby was moving in the other direction... there's still hope though! go back to raw!

to me, the point of a hobby is to get better at it... post processing is just one part of photography... I didn't agree with it at all at first, but now I am all about it... especially since I can't afford really nice lenses... it's another aspect of photography that you can practice at and get better and pick up little tips here and there... and you can post process on a rainy day.

You do know that professional photographers (ie. sports photographers) shoot in jpeg right?

is photography a hobby for them?

professionals have other things to think about. Time is money, after all. I'm just saying that for me, post processing is just another part of photography that I want to get better at. If you're a professional who shoots in JPG to save time, then more power to you.

 

[itznfb]

Edit to my last post... I should include the D700 in that list. I didn't think it had the newest ADL but I just checked the specs and it does have the same ADL as the rest I listed.

 

[Derrel]

No, this is not a Canon vs Nikon debate Robert, but the facts and the truth are out there. Nikon was a pioneer in TTL flash metering through the lens, after Olympus did it first. Nikon invented the Matrix metering system with the Nikon FA, and the matrix was tuned for color NEGATIVE film. The ability to measure the exact RGB components of subjects is pretty easy for computers to do--and skilled photoshop workers can look at human skin tones and color-sample exact figures for precise Caucasian skin tone and quote you the R-G-and B values of average skin.

Canon's new 7D has figured out a way to circumvent Nikon's patented RGB measuring method....Canon is justifiably proud of its new 63-zone,color-, focus-, and luminosity-aware light metering. system.Rob Galbraith DPI: Autofocus, video and more

"This analysis of brightness, colour and AF data in determining exposure has been given a name by Canon: iFCL. It's an acronym constructed from the words Intelligence, Focus, Colour and Luminosity." quote from above URL

The reason so,so many D90 users like Noyze are so pumped about their D90's is because the D90 represents 25 years of RGB light metering work,and 20 years worth of TTL flash metering work, and 10 years' worth of in-camera digital SLR image processing work; the D90 is designed to be the ultimate high-end point and shoot d-slr, and Nikon spent the first 7 years of the d-slr era outputting "safe", low-contrast, drecky-looking in-camera JPEGs, while the Olympus corporation OTOH, punched the daylights out of their color,and spits out SOOC JPEGs that the British girlie photographers ate up... FujiFilm's S3 Pro and S5 Pro also showed Nikon that hey, consumers LOVE punchy, in-camera,already processed JPEGs.

A few years back, Nikon SOOC JPEGs looked dull and ugly; Canon images were brighter, and more-processed. Nikon's D50 of 2005 was the first-ever Nikon to punch up the color. Now, with the D90, they've taken things up a notch. With an old D70, you would never blow a highlight, because the in-camera tone curve applied was so cautious Nikon protected the highlights, knowing full well that every pro would Photoshop-adjust the image. At the same time, Canon was more adventurous on cameras like the 20D, going "hotter" with the metering and image processing. I've been using d-slr's since 2001 with the Nikon D1 and moving through time, I have seen the d-slr go from the "professional's tool" to a highly-automated, much more capable camera with more automation and more computer processing. Look, Canon can identify/mitigate/reduce image noise with amazing ability, and they can do all sorts of great things with their huge manufacturing base and mega-size.

Canon's 7D is now being touted as having color-aware light metering. Look, a jumbo jet can fly itself on autopilot. Modern automation is incredible.
The more information the computer takes in, the better the outcome. The OP asked if a RAW could give him the benefits of a JPEG,and he has a D90; I answered his question with knowledge and truthfulness. This isn't a Canon vs Nikon war. If you want snappy SOOC JPEGS, buy an Olympus or look for a used Fuji S5 Pro and use the film simulation modes, or buy a D90 and let 25 years of the company's experience in matrix metering do the work. The D90 is meant as an amateur/hobbyist/P&S SLR that takes *great* pictures. It has a better image than the D300 did. The OP probably can not get the same end result by shooting raw. Why do pilots fly 80 percent of many flights on auto pilot? Are they stupid or incapable?

 

[robertwsimpson]

I'm not going to lie, that is way too much for me to read without losing interest.

Regardless, look at the thread title, and answer the question. Does a RAW image file give you the abilities that a JPG does? I'm going to go ahead and say yes, because no matter what your camera can do, you can do the same in post processing. And more.