What is RAW anyway?

[cryforashadow]

I have no idea what it is.
I searched and searched around the net. I took photos. I still don't understand. I take pictures RAW+small JPEG, and somehow they both look the same to me. I changed the parameter. Still RAW and JPEG are the same. They're in the same size. They look the same and the funniest part is that both of them are JPEG.
What am I doing wrong?
ALSO, I don't quite understand this. Why can't I edit my pictures in JPEG format [I used to do it all the time, till I heard about this RAW thing]? Why do I have to use the RAW format? Why is RAW such a big deal?

[tzalman]

You don't HAVE to use RAW. You can do a fair amount of editing to a jpg. You can do more to a RAW with less danger of posterizing the shadows and causing quantization losses in compressed tones while exploiting the greater dynamic range available. Many RAW converters can recover partially clipped highlights, jpg clips highlights and throws them away. Small adjustments in WB can be made to a jpg, but a major change will not look good. WB can be changed endlessly in RAW.
For an understanding of RAW, read this:
http://www.ronbigelow.com/articles/raw/raw.htm
and for a great example of what you can do with RAW:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=503988

[qtaran111]

RAW is kind of like a digital version of a film negative which requires post-processing (PP). JPG will already have been processed (sharpening, contrast, hue/sat, white balance etc) in camera, depending on the camera settings (colour space, styles etc).

RAW gives you a huge amount of latitude in PP to change/correct all these things, but obviously requires more time due to the need to PP.

All you ever wanted to know about RAW:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=80337
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/camera-raw.shtml
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/why_use_raw.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAW_image_format

[Boucher]

^^.

The name really says it all. The photo is taken and the camera makes absolutely no adjustments on the file. You then need a RAW editor such as DPP, Lightroom, Photoshop (there is many other programs out there) to then process the file.

jpeg however, the photo is taken and some are adjustments are made in camera depending on your settings, aswell as changing from 16 bit to 8 bit.

It also depends on what you shoot and how good you are at nailing exposure every time. if you get the exposure wrong in camera you can adjust it more in Raw then you would be able to in jpeg..

Hope all that has been said clears some things up for you.

:)

[PhotosGuy]

aswell as changing from 16 bit to 8 bit. I think that should read "12 bit to 8 bit", but the point is you get more for your money. Think of it as a free camera upgrade! ;)

When to begin shooting in RAW? (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=343960)

Some excellent comparison images: RAW vs. JPEG - the real story (http://prophotolife.com/2008/04/29/tech-raw-vs-jpeg-the-real-story/)

[cryforashadow]

Thanks for the help! It's appreciated. I added all those links to my favorites and read some too. And I guess I'll start shooting in RAW from now on.

BUT, shouldn't the picture's format be RAW when I shoot in RAW? I just don't understand. It's still JPEG for me. And also as I said before the JPEG and RAW pictures are the same size. Is there something that I'm doing wrong?

[frankgindc]

Think of RAW as a sort of machine code or camera language.
It records the information directly form the sensor in the camera which, if you are "shooting jpeg", the camera then uses to interpret into a jpg file. When you shoot in jpeg mode the camera is still capturing the RAW data but is instantly translating it using software in the camera into a jpg.

When the conversion happens in camera, the conversion to jpeg sort of forecloses the ability to interpret the data differently later. That may not be an issue, in most cases, but one area where it can become an issue is in difficult lighting conditions where some detail might be "blown out" or "lost in the shadows." In short, that data might have been captured by the sensor in the RAW file but can be discarded when converted into a jpeg, b/c the software has to make decisions about white balance, exposure, etc. that are not reversible. ie data is lost.

When you are "shooting RAW", you are simply not doing that conversion in the camera and you are waiting until later to do that conversion into something usable (remember, the RAW file is not a std format, like a .doc, or .tiff, but the proprietary machine language of the camera, so it's not usable or printable until it gets translated into something else).

When you do the conversion later, the advantage is that you have more latitude to make larger changes to how the image gets interpreted, can use different RAW converters to see which works best (Bibble, LR, Photoshop ACR etc.). Among the downside is that you must do that extra labor that the camera would have done, you need to make informed adjustments/interpretations that are better than the camera would have if you had just shot jpg, and you are dealing with larger data files. Some are religously fervent about what to shoot, but I think in most cases it doesn't offer than many advantes (btw, I do shoot RAW almost all the time however, just because I want that piece of mind to be able to adjust alot later if need be, and it has helped me save a few shots that would have been blown out otherwise, but I don't know that the time and effort on balance has paid off yet)

Anyhoo, many dSLRs have a RAW+jpg mode, so before saying that one size fits all, I'd experiment and see if it makes that much diff to your shooting (rock concerts with harsh lighting would be more likely than landscapes in easy lighting, for example), and whether you like the advantages/disadvantages, etc.

Frank

[Zazoh]

Thanks for the help! It's appreciated. I added all those links to my favorites and read some too. And I guess I'll start shooting in RAW from now on.

BUT, shouldn't the picture's format be RAW when I shoot in RAW? I just don't understand. It's still JPEG for me. And also as I said before the JPEG and RAW pictures are the same size. Is there something that I'm doing wrong?

Yes, how are you getting the images on your computer. If you are using MS windows image wizard you are only pulling the JPGs from your card. Please explain how you are getting images to computer. Do you see any files with a CR2 extension? Those are the RAW ones, about 3 times bigger in size than JPG.

Use a card reader and manually move them over. One word of caution, if you can't edit / archive / crop / store / sort a JPG don't even start with RAW yet.

[Boucher]

I think that should read "12 bit to 8 bit", but the point is you get more for your money. Think of it as a free camera upgrade! ;)

When to begin shooting in RAW? (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=343960)

Some excellent comparison images: RAW vs. JPEG - the real story (http://prophotolife.com/2008/04/29/tech-raw-vs-jpeg-the-real-story/)


oop, my bad.

Oh and by the way RAW will not work in any of the basic modes of your camera. It will only work in AV, TV, M and I think (P and A-DEP).

So I think that might be your problem.

[cryforashadow]

Thanks Frank, that was really helpful.
Dear Zazoh, I just open the folder in My Computer when I connect my camera to the computer. And copy them into another folder. (And every picture that I took has been doubled there. One's like IMG_1219 and the other's like IMG_1219 (31). I think the second one is supposed to be RAW. But it's exactly like the first one.) I guess I shouldn't do this then. I had no idea. What should I do?
BTW I can edit my pictures. I'm not as stupid as I seem. :D
Boucha: Thanks but I don't think that's the case because I don't use the basic modes.

[rc13k]

I have no idea what it is.
I searched and searched around the net. I took photos. I still don't understand. I take pictures RAW+small JPEG, and somehow they both look the same to me. I changed the parameter. Still RAW and JPEG are the same. They're in the same size. They look the same and the funniest part is that both of them are JPEG.
What am I doing wrong?
ALSO, I don't quite understand this. Why can't I edit my pictures in JPEG format [I used to do it all the time, till I heard about this RAW thing]? Why do I have to use the RAW format? Why is RAW such a big deal?

Is it possible to shoot in RAW + small jpeg? I can only shoot raw + large jpeg.

[cryforashadow]

No, I don't think it's possible. My bad. :D

[tzalman]

Thanks Frank, that was really helpful.
Dear Zazoh, I just open the folder in My Computer when I connect my camera to the computer. And copy them into another folder. (And every picture that I took has been doubled there. One's like IMG_1219 and the other's like IMG_1219 (31). I think the second one is supposed to be RAW. But it's exactly like the first one.) I guess I shouldn't do this then. I had no idea. What should I do?
BTW I can edit my pictures. I'm not as stupid as I seem. :D
Boucha: Thanks but I don't think that's the case because I don't use the basic modes.
That's a problem that is raised here about three times a week. There are two answers:
1. Install EOS Utility which is on the disc that was bundled with the camera. It will either Auto-play when you turn the camera on or you can open it yourself. It will show you thumbs of the shots and you can either select all or part. It can also be set up to download only new shots on the card. It automatically creates new folders named by shooting date and sorts the files into them.
2. Buy a card reader. They are cheap, download faster and save your camera's battery. It will appear as a new drive in My Computer and from the reader you can drag&drop or copy&paste or access it from any RAW converter and use it to import the files.

[California4Life]

windows is too stupid, or maybe I should say "retarded" and doesn't recognize the raw extension when you have 2 files with the same name...
so you have to download the free raw file and thumbnail viewer from the microsoft site...

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=D48E808E-B10D-4CE4-A141-5866FD4A3286&displaylang=en

2 things to be aware of: if you don't have an official copy of windows, don't dl this, cause it checks...

also, it doesn't open raw files from the xti or 40d... however, it does open raw files from the 20d, xt, and 5d plus a bunch of other cameras... either way, it should solve the file-doubling problem you have, I would imagine...

if not, try shooting in raw only and that will solve the problem just as easily... or just get a mac! ;)

[cryforashadow]

^ I just realized that if I only shoot RAW and not RAW+Large JPEG then the RAW pictures are in CR2 format. Windows sure is retarted. :D
Thanks guys. I learnt a lot.

[PixelMagic]

^ I just realized that if I only shoot RAW and not RAW+Large JPEG then the RAW pictures are in CR2 format.

And if you shot RAW only the files - they are not pictures or images - will still have the CR2 file extension.[/quote]


Windows sure is retarted. :D
Thanks guys. I learnt a lot.

It really doesn't have much to do with Windows per se, but with the fact that RAW files are simply a data capture by the camera sensor and are not in a rendered image format like JPEG, TIFF, png, etc.
Your operating system is designed to recognized univerally accepted, standardized image file formats like those mentioned; RAW files, on the other hand, don't become "images" until they a processed through a RAW converter. Also, RAW files are certainly not standardized, which is the reason why RAW converters have to be updated when new camera models are released....the file format isn't always the same even if the all have CR2 file name extension.

[Zazoh]

BTW I can edit my pictures. I'm not as stupid as I seem. :D

Didn't intend to imply that. I give that caveat frequently. Many folks hear about RAW, understand the technical benifits, but don't understand the specific requirements and limitations of the software.

[Shooting]

Which is why I don't shoot raw..Raw bypasses ALL your camera settings for sharpness, color, etc...all your settings are bypassed giving you a raw image requiring you to do ALL that yourself. I shot raw for 2 years and quit. You can maniuplate your jpeg images in CS3 using it's raw editor. I like how my camera processes it's image..all I have to do is sharpen, remove some noise, do some special effects and I'm done. Plus, I don't want to end up like the early Nikon users who cannot find software to read it's early raw files. Raw is very proprietary. You shoot raw now and a few years from now there may not be any sofware to open them unless you convert them to jpeg. Jpeg is universal. I have "saved as" up to 10 times the same file (12 quality) without a hint of image degradation so don't pay much attention to those who talk about damaging the images..you can always go back to the original.

[PhotosGuy]

And, here we would go again, except that the OPs question has been answered & I'm locking the thread! ;)