Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 02 Jun 2009 (Tuesday) 11:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Should I shoot in RAW?

 
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
48,190 posts
Gallery: 79 photos
Likes: 4338
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jun 02, 2009 14:42 |  #46

picturecrazy wrote in post #8036195 (external link)
more like a few HUNDRED clicks for a few files.

If you are saying it's as easy as applying a preset to the batch and then exporting the lot... then you might as well be shooting jpeg and save even more time. ...

...this assumes that he does not want to best quality image file, or the most re workable image file, or that he is happy to settle for a jpeg at all.


Both file types have there advantages, but the fact is that RAW offers the superior image quality, this can not be disputed.

We can break down the benefits of RAW Vs. Jpeg in two categories to simplify.

1. Simple brute force Image quality.

2. Flexibility and workability.

Most people get hung up on the latter, and seem forget that it's not the only reason to chose RAW. We see accusations of using it as a crutch. etc..

These thoughts do not take into account the simple concept that many simply want the best available to them.

Even if I did no RAW specific processing tricks, I'd still want the best overall image quality. I'd still shoot RAW.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
lucas107
Member
82 posts
Joined Dec 2008
     
Jun 02, 2009 14:48 |  #47

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #8036681 (external link)
...this assumes that he does not want to best quality image file, or the most re workable image file, or that he is happy to settle for a jpeg at all.


Both file types have there advantages, but the fact is that RAW offers the superior image quality, this can not be disputed.

We can break down the benefits of RAW Vs. Jpeg in two categories to simplify.

1. Simple brute force Image quality.

2. Flexibility and workability.

Most people get hung up on the latter, and seem forget that it's not the only reason to chose RAW. We see accusations of using it as a crutch. etc..

These thoughts do not take into account the simple concept that many simply want the best available to them.

Even if I did no RAW specific processing tricks, I'd still want the best overall image quality. I'd still shoot RAW.

how big does the picture have to be printed/viewed to really notice a difference at any distance you would actually view a photo. who goes to see someones pictures puts their face to the photo and says hey if you shot raw this could be 1.5% sharper. dont most people view it as a whole? im not a photographer by any meaning of the word but i do enjoy photos and id never say or think something could be better if it was just a smidge sharper because im never that close. ive seen some very large prints from 35mm which up close did not look the greatest but at a normal viewing distance were amazing. if you cared that much about quality why not use a 4X5 or bigger? its cheaper to buy


20d, 50 1.8, 70-210 3.5-4.5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lostid
Goldmember
2,622 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Oct 2008
Location: 22° 08' 22" N / 127° 51' 29" W
     
Jun 02, 2009 14:48 |  #48

Absolutely unless you shoot for items listed on eBay or Craiglist.


flickr (external link) & Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cfibanez
Senior Member
Avatar
855 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
     
Jun 02, 2009 14:57 |  #49

lucas107 wrote in post #8036680 (external link)
... but if your just shooting a bird for fun then shoot jpeg and figure out how to use your camera properly.

Ooops... take it easy my friend. This is a friendly forum. We share our experiences, we learn from each other, and put our prestige aside.


5D4 | 7D2 | 11-24/4.0 L | 16-35/2.8 L III | 24/1.4 L II | 24-105/4.0 L IS | 40/2.8 STM | 85/1.2 L II | 100/2.8 L macro IS | 70-200/2.8 L IS II | 100-400 L IS II | 400/4.0 DO L II | 580EXII | EF 1.4x III | Gitzo monopod GM2541 | Gitzo tripod GT2541 | Really Right Stuff ball head & plates | B+W & Singh-Ray filters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lucas107
Member
82 posts
Joined Dec 2008
     
Jun 02, 2009 14:59 |  #50

cfibanez wrote in post #8036778 (external link)
Ooops... take it easy my friend. This is a friendly forum. We share our experiences, we learn from each other, and put our prestige aside.

how is that not taking it easy? even if your are shooting raw you it still helps to have your camera set up properly. i bet there isnt one person on this forum who atleast does not strive for proper exposure on each shot hence the learn to use your camera. i wasnt saying they dont know how to use the camera i was just saying to everyone in the world who uses a camera...learn to use it makes things easier.
edit
also sorry if it seems angry or anything but i just find people ask this jpeg raw thing all the time and everyone is always if you want your pictures to look good shoot raw then someone always says i shoot jpeg when im listing something on ebay. i just find a cockyness to half the people who comment on this. its the same as the manual vs av tv settings. the people who shoot manual (not all of them but some) seem to think they are better and that its the best way to do it when what can you do that i cant in av with my exposure compensation of +- 2 stops? again not you but some people.
OP if you shoot jpeg do you find yourself doing much pp?
if not keep jpeg
if so shoot raw
might as well


20d, 50 1.8, 70-210 3.5-4.5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
22,716 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 270
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Jun 02, 2009 15:04 |  #51

lostid wrote in post #8036720 (external link)
Absolutely unless you shoot for items listed on eBay or Craiglist.

for quick and dirty pics i open my raw files in irfanview, resize, sharpen and save as jpeg, which takes no more time than shooting a jpeg :D.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, 430exII, gitzo 3542, gitzo GM4562, markins Q10, markins Q3, kirk, really right stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
charliec
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jun 02, 2009 15:10 |  #52

lucas107 wrote in post #8036719 (external link)
how big does the picture have to be printed/viewed to really notice a difference at any distance you would actually view a photo. who goes to see someones pictures puts their face to the photo and says hey if you shot raw this could be 1.5% sharper. dont most people view it as a whole? im not a photographer by any meaning of the word but i do enjoy photos and id never say or think something could be better if it was just a smidge sharper because im never that close. ive seen some very large prints from 35mm which up close did not look the greatest but at a normal viewing distance were amazing. if you cared that much about quality why not use a 4X5 or bigger? its cheaper to buy

If it's no more work, why not get the extra 1.5%?

Besides, I like being able to open, edit, and save a file repeatedly without the loss of any information. You can't do that with a JPG.


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
22,716 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 270
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Jun 02, 2009 15:12 |  #53

charliec wrote in post #8036874 (external link)
If it's no more work, why not get the extra 1.5%?

Besides, I like being able to open, edit, and save a file repeatedly without the loss of any information. You can't do that with a JPG.

sure you can. just rename the file and "save as".

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, 430exII, gitzo 3542, gitzo GM4562, markins Q10, markins Q3, kirk, really right stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lostid
Goldmember
2,622 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Oct 2008
Location: 22° 08' 22" N / 127° 51' 29" W
     
Jun 02, 2009 15:16 |  #54

ed rader wrote in post #8036835 (external link)
for quick and dirty pics i open my raw files in irfanview, resize, sharpen and save as jpeg, which takes no more time than shooting a jpeg :D.

ed rader

Thanks for the info. I got to try the irfanview.


flickr (external link) & Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
charliec
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jun 02, 2009 15:18 |  #55

ed rader wrote in post #8036888 (external link)
sure you can. just rename the file and "save as".

ed rader

Ha ha, I know I can do that, but I meant saving over single files. I don't have to save edits of images. I can save the edited RAW file, and if I want the original file back, all of the information is still there.


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
picturecrazy
soft-hearted weenie-boy
Avatar
8,552 posts
Likes: 218
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Alberta, CANADA
     
Jun 02, 2009 15:42 |  #56

cfibanez wrote in post #8036361 (external link)
Flip it into RAW? Picturecrazy, I'm sorry, but after such statement, I don't think you understand what RAW is about.

Congratulations!!!

This is the best statement of the entire thread. :p

I know exactly what RAW is about. That's why I know exactly when it's not needed for what I'm trying to achieve. Everyone has differing opinions of what they need, but it's pretty rampant on this board for people to say that RAW SHOULD BE THE ONLY WAY TO SHOOT. Because really... that is not quite the case.


-Lloyd
The BOUDOIR - Edmonton Intimate Boudoir Photography (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Studio Family Baby Child Maternity Wedding Photographers (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Headshot Photographers (external link)
Facebook (external link) | Twitter (external link) |Instagram (external link) | Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thatkatmat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,340 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 187
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, don't move here, it's wet and cold
     
Jun 02, 2009 15:49 |  #57

picturecrazy wrote in post #8037081 (external link)
Everyone has differing opinions of what they need, .

True, everyone has their own workflow, different strokes for different folks.
Furthermore,
saying picturecrazy doesn't understand what he's talking about?....Take a look at the links in his sig....Some very nice work...
Cheers


My Flickr (external link)
Stuff
"Never rat on your friends and always keep your mouth shut." -Jimmy Conway
a9, 12-24/4G, 24-70/2.8GM, 100-400GM, 25/2 Batis, 55/1.8ZA, 85 /1.8FE, 85LmkII, 135L...a6300,10-18/4, 16-50PZ, 18-105PZ

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CosmoKid
Goldmember
Avatar
4,235 posts
Likes: 4
Joined May 2009
Location: NJ
     
Jun 02, 2009 16:04 |  #58

Specific Question:
I am shooting a concert tonight, indoors, and shooting RAW. I will be using exposure compensation +- 1/3.

Do I even need to use exposure compensation since it sounds like I can post-process to fix these small mistakes?


Joe- 2 bodies, L 2.8 zoom trilogy and a couple of primes
iRocktheShot.com (external link) - Portfolio (external link)

Gear/Feedback
Facebook "Fan" Page (external link) -

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
5x5 ­ photography
Goldmember
Avatar
1,156 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Location: North Carolina
     
Jun 02, 2009 16:21 |  #59

AudibleSilence wrote in post #8036128 (external link)
My cameras never leave RAW. What would ever be the need to do so??? CF/SD cards are dirt cheap and converting raw to jpeg is as simple as a few clicks in post.

If you are shooting a lot of high volume fast FPS the RAW images drive down the FPS and fill up the buffer much faster.
When I need to shoot a lot of actions shots and speed counts I never shoot RAW.
I forgot to take my 40D off RAW and Ljpeg when I saw a Great Blue Heron standing on a rock dam. I snapped a few shots and when he took off I held the shutter button down. The buffer filled up fast and I missed a few great shots.
After PP the RAW vs jpeg there was not a great deal of difference. The IQ of the RAW images were better but not by enough for me to feel good about missing the action shots.
When the picture really matters I will switch to RAW but I agree that with proper technique and a little PP jpeg images can be great especially when you don't print over 8X10.


My firearms review site. http://rangehot.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
22,716 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 270
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Jun 02, 2009 16:33 |  #60

charliec wrote in post #8036925 (external link)
Ha ha, I know I can do that, but I meant saving over single files. I don't have to save edits of images. I can save the edited RAW file, and if I want the original file back, all of the information is still there.

then use lightroom, which is "non-destructive".

the only reason i'm bringing this up is that some people think exactly what you said the first time, which is not true :D.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, 430exII, gitzo 3542, gitzo GM4562, markins Q10, markins Q3, kirk, really right stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

9,220 views & 0 likes for this thread
Should I shoot in RAW?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.0forum software
version 2.0 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is insurfr
671 guests, 343 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.