Friday Night MiLB

[Sauk]

Went and shot tonight. Enjoy. I shot raw tonight on the Mark III and to be honest I like being able to adjust the profile, but to be honest I like jpeg images better then raw images.

1.
http://matthewsauk.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p568373000-4.jpg

2
http://matthewsauk.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p742997086-3.jpg

3.
http://matthewsauk.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p876842485-3.jpg

4
http://matthewsauk.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p798665379-4.jpg

[SportsOnFilm]

Matt,

Just curious - what do you like better about JPG images vs. the JPG you create from a RAW file? I have shot exclusively RAW for the last 2+ years now and love the ability to tweak the RAW file before generating the JPG.

BTW - when will we see these images in the FSI folders? :-)

[New Hobby]

I like them all but #2 is the winner.

[Sauk]

Matt,

Just curious - what do you like better about JPG images vs. the JPG you create from a RAW file? I have shot exclusively RAW for the last 2+ years now and love the ability to tweak the RAW file before generating the JPG.

BTW - when will we see these images in the FSI folders? :-)

I don't know to be honest. I like the look of jpeg right out of the camera. I guess I got used to shooting for final image instead of shooting to adjust later.

Sometime this weekend. I will be captioning the Yakima team and a few of the pitchers for Spokane tomorrow.

[Sauk]

I like them all but #2 is the winner.


Thanks ;)

[Smad728]

That water mark is very distracting. maybe you should tone it down a bit. but all of your pictures are great

[flauri]

Matt I like these. Colors look great and they are nice & sharp. I think on #3 it could be cropped down some to get a tighter look.

I never shot RAW for sports but it seems like it would be a little time consuming in editing. To me getting it right...or as close to that as possible in camera (which I like to do) seems like an easier process. But that's me and RAW may be a good thing and work better for others. Just my 2 cents.

Nice shots non the less.

Frank Lauri

[Sauk]

Smad728,

I apologize for the watermark, but it is something I like to have on my images just in case :(

flauri,

the look on #3 was more or an artistic shot I was going for. I was trying to get the wide view of a player hitting the ball and having the ball still in the shot. Guess I should have put that above the image so people would know.

Thanks again for the comments :)

[SportsOnFilm]

Matt I like these. Colors look great and they are nice & sharp. I think on #3 it could be cropped down some to get a tighter look.

I never shot RAW for sports but it seems like it would be a little time consuming in editing. To me getting it right...or as close to that as possible in camera (which I like to do) seems like an easier process. But that's me and RAW may be a good thing and work better for others. Just my 2 cents.

Nice shots non the less.

Frank Lauri


Let me clarify - I am not shooting RAW so that I can "fix" the photos later. I do my very best to get it right in camera. I shoot in manual mode almost 100% of the time and try to make sure my settings are correct. I am not an expert when it comes to color in terms of tonal range, etc., but for me the colors that come from correct processing of a RAW file look better to me. Yes, shooting RAW increases the amount of time it takes for me to edit a game, but I am very rarely on deadline so time is not normally an issue. Secondly, a RAW file is not compressed like a JPG, and I can open a RAW file over and over and it will never lose any quality. Everytime you open a JPG file and save it, it gets compressed a little more than the time before.

I am not trying to say that one method is better than the other - just that for me I think the end result of processing a RAW file to me looks better than a JPG straight from the camera.

[Sauk]

Brian,

Yeah I don't mind shooting raw to be honest. I used to do it till I began shooting with strobes and what not and I just shot for final with jpeg.

I do like the ability to pick the camera profile though in LR2.