Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
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?

 
lucas107
Member
82 posts
Joined Dec 2008
     
Jun 03, 2009 06:45 |  #91

johnaengus wrote in post #8038236 (external link)
I'm very new at digital. I have been shooting RAW+JPEG. I really don't mind spending the time processing RAW images. It just is cool to me to have better control over how the JPEG turns out. To me, shooting in JPEG is like sending your 35mm roll of film to a lab - you hope they print it like you saw it. Many times, I have areas of the image that need burning. In my experience, with RAW, there is more data to work with to darken part of the image. I was frequently disappointed with film labs and their interpretation of how things looked. Now, I am in command.

you can change how your camera processes the raw to a jpeg its not like it does something different every time. it does what you tell it to do.
also i just printed a 20X30 from my 20d that looks perfect and it was shot as large normal jpeg not even the large fine. if you dont plan on changing the picture i dont think the quality argument can be used.
basically if you like pp shoot raw
if you like to do artsy things (pp wise) shoot raw
if there is tricky lighting shoot raw
if you have taken 5k pics on your camera in 2 months and havnt been off more then 1/3 a stop and dont like the artsy pics of my kids then shoot jpeg
basically if your me shoot jpeg


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
lungdoc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,101 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2006
Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Canada
     
Jun 03, 2009 06:52 |  #92

I really don't see the point of shooting both RAW + jpg - unless you are under time pressure to give clients/relatives etc. something immediately. It's so easy to reproduce the in-camera processing that it seems to me a waste of card, storage and backup space to have two copies of everything. I also would end up wasting time looking for subtle differences between the two images. I have the LR presets that give extremely close approximations of the in-camera settings; I use it as my starting point and adjust from there.


Mark
My Smugmug (external link) Eos 7D, Canon G1X II, Canon 15-85 IS, Canon 17-85 IS, Sigma 100-300 EX IF HSM, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 85mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Sigma 50-150 2.8, Sigma 1.4 EX DG , Sigma 24-70 F2.8 DG Macro, Canon EF-S 10-22, Canon 430EX,

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cfibanez
Senior Member
Avatar
859 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
     
Jun 03, 2009 07:50 |  #93

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.

picturecrazy wrote in post #8037081 (external link)
Congratulations!!!
This is the best statement of the entire thread. :p
I know exactly what RAW is about....

I did not mean to be offensive. But in all honesty, there is nothing like "flip it into RAW". You see, all RAW formats are proprietary including Canon. None knows excatly what Canon does to produce its RAW files, and there is no program or device --aside from Canon cameras-- that can save a file in Canon RAW format. You can not "flip a jpeg file into RAW", at least not Canon RAW, simply because none knows what Canon RAW actually is. Hence the existence of so-called open RAW formats, such as Adobe DNG. Adobe has tried to standardize RAW formats among camera vendors for ages without success.

Picturecrazy, I strongly recommend that you read one of the CameraRaw books written by Bruce Fraser. You will then better understand what RAW is about (Canon or otherwise), how to exploit it, and why it makes such a difference from jpeg.


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
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Jun 03, 2009 07:56 as a reply to  @ cfibanez's post |  #94

Even if RAW was "open" (ala DNG), you still can't take a demoasiced AND compressed JPG and reverse engineer it into the original RAW data. (ok, maybe you could take a demosaiced TIFF file and generate the RAW data, but converting it to 8-bits and compressing it into JPG makes it impossible)

Can you take an mp3 and turn it back into the SOURCE PCM data?

I think what picturecrazy was getting at was "flipping" it into RAW on the camera by changing the "Record Mode", much like what Pentax does with the dedicated RAW button.

If he DID think you could take a JPG and in DPP say "Convert to RAW", then yeah, he is way off base ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
picturecrazy
soft-hearted weenie-boy
Avatar
8,565 posts
Likes: 736
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Alberta, CANADA
     
Jun 03, 2009 08:23 |  #95

cfibanez wrote in post #8040924 (external link)
I did not mean to be offensive. But in all honesty, there is nothing like "flip it into RAW". You see, all RAW formats are proprietary including Canon. None knows excatly what Canon does to produce its RAW files, and there is no program or device --aside from Canon cameras-- that can save a file in Canon RAW format. You can not "flip a jpeg file into RAW", at least not Canon RAW, simply because none knows what Canon RAW actually is. Hence the existence of so-called open RAW formats, such as Adobe DNG. Adobe has tried to standardize RAW formats among camera vendors for ages without success.

Picturecrazy, I strongly recommend that you read one of the CameraRaw books written by Bruce Fraser. You will then better understand what RAW is about (Canon or otherwise), how to exploit it, and why it makes such a difference from jpeg.

yeah, as egordon said, all I mean by 'flip it into RAW' is to switch the setting on your camera so it writes a CR2/CRW file to your CF card rather than a jpeg file. I'm no stranger to RAW at all, but I'm also no stranger to jpeg. They're both completely valid formats.


-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
butugly
Senior Member
621 posts
Joined Mar 2006
Location: chelmsford,essex.UK
     
Jun 03, 2009 08:28 |  #96

lungdoc wrote in post #8040700 (external link)
I really don't see the point of shooting both RAW + jpg - unless you are under time pressure to give clients/relatives etc. something immediately. It's so easy to reproduce the in-camera processing that it seems to me a waste of card, storage and backup space to have two copies of everything. I also would end up wasting time looking for subtle differences between the two images. I have the LR presets that give extremely close approximations of the in-camera settings; I use it as my starting point and adjust from there.


if you shoot both you can make an instant slide show quickly,it all depends what you shoot and what you shoot for.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cfibanez
Senior Member
Avatar
859 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
     
Jun 03, 2009 10:13 |  #97

egordon99 wrote in post #8040944 (external link)
I think what picturecrazy was getting at was "flipping" it into RAW on the camera by changing the "Record Mode", much like what Pentax does with the dedicated RAW button.

I can't see how you can "flip" a jpeg into RAW, even on the camera, once the picture has been taken and recorded.


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
WaltA
Goldmember
Avatar
3,868 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 119
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Ladysmith, BC, Canada
     
Jun 03, 2009 10:16 |  #98

cfibanez wrote in post #8041724 (external link)
I can't see how you can "flip" a jpeg into RAW, even on the camera, once the picture has been taken and recorded.

He's talking about changing the camera setting and retaking the picture in raw. I knew as soon as I read his post saying this, that there would be many people that mis-understood it.


Walt
400D, 5D, 7D and a bag of stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lungdoc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,101 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2006
Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Canada
     
Jun 03, 2009 10:22 |  #99

butugly wrote in post #8041134 (external link)
if you shoot both you can make an instant slide show quickly,it all depends what you shoot and what you shoot for.

Hence my qualifier - kind of covers exactly your point..no?

lungdoc wrote in post #8040700 (external link)
- unless you are under time pressure to give clients/relatives etc. something immediately.


Mark
My Smugmug (external link) Eos 7D, Canon G1X II, Canon 15-85 IS, Canon 17-85 IS, Sigma 100-300 EX IF HSM, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 85mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Sigma 50-150 2.8, Sigma 1.4 EX DG , Sigma 24-70 F2.8 DG Macro, Canon EF-S 10-22, Canon 430EX,

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cfibanez
Senior Member
Avatar
859 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
     
Jun 03, 2009 10:28 |  #100

WaltA wrote in post #8041739 (external link)
He's talking about changing the camera setting and retaking the picture in raw. I knew as soon as I read his post saying this, that there would be many people that mis-understood it.

Thanks. I guess the word "flip" was not a happy choice there ... ;)


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
rklepper
Dignity-Esteem-Compassion
Avatar
8,994 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Dec 2003
Location: No longer living at the center of the known universe, moved just slightly to the right. Iowa, USA.
     
Jun 03, 2009 10:29 |  #101

Someone (and I cannot remember who) on here said it was like boiling vegetables. When you boil them a lot of the goodness goes away. Same thing, RAW just contains more information that the jpeg compression throws away.


Doc Klepper in the USA
I
am a photorealist, I like my photos with a touch of what was actually there.
Polite C&C always welcome, Thanks. Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ziffle
Goldmember
Avatar
1,896 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Big "D" - Texas
     
Jun 03, 2009 13:02 |  #102

now we are into food ....sweet!
so now we can 'flip' some eggs ...... ;)

Meaning:
Shooting jpeg is like making scrambled eggs. They can be hard or soft, even a little seasoned .... but they are still scrambled eggs.

Shooting RAW images is like making.... an omelet and then switch to over-easy or maybe eggs Benedict is your style .... or some scrambled eggs.

The point: Once you go down the path of Jpeg - you have thrown away data that you can not get back - ever.
W/ RAW - you can always restart/reset and work w/ the full data set.

so .... how do you like your eggs? .....flipped? (sorry - could not resist) ;)

(i heard this analogy form a member of POTN - just don't know who.)


Later,
_Mark


_______________
Wedding Photog's rule ........... just not sure what???
--
Gear List ~ VIAweddingPhoto(DOT)co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jahled
Goldmember
Avatar
1,498 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jun 2008
Location: North London
     
Jun 03, 2009 13:33 as a reply to  @ Ziffle's post |  #103

I shoot in raw simply because why wouldn't you if you are taking shots as part a job! The jpg format is nice and handy (and I generally shoot in both) but you are instantly far more limited as to what you can correct on a computer-our new darkrooms.

Food for thought, I supplied a photo of a baby Slow Loris two years ago to National Geographic*; they wanted raw format if possible. I didn't know how to reply given I was scanning the image from a slide from 1992 :)

*Edit: National Geographic August 2007


James
Snow Leopards of Leafy London- The magic begins 5th November 20:00 hours on Animal Planet :) | Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
52,164 posts
Gallery: 192 photos
Likes: 9038
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jun 03, 2009 13:34 |  #104

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

Perception varies from one person to another, and I don't claim that everyone can see the difference between a good jpeg and a RAW, nor did I claim that it would matter to everyone.

I stated instead what the actual fact is, not what the subjective outcome is.
When you shoot jpeg only, you at the press of the button throw out a significant amount of the color data by allowing the camera to truncate the file from 12 or 14 bits to an 8 bit jpeg, and you lose detail immediately via compression.

to some people this is as important or more important than the files workability.

As to your suggestion that if one is interested in IQ, they should shoot 4x5,.

4X5 is FAR more expensive when you take the lenses into consideration that one would need to shoot what I happen to shoot, and why change formats to get better IQ when one can simply select a menu setting on their existing camera to get the best that the camera is capable of?

If total image quality is of paramount importance to someone, than it is simple logic to shoot using the file type that offers all of the capability that the manufacturer designed into the tool.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
52,164 posts
Gallery: 192 photos
Likes: 9038
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jun 03, 2009 13:40 |  #105

rumplepigskin wrote in post #8039959 (external link)
I've never tried RAW yet either and was wondering if I can use Photoshop cs3 to convert and work with them?

Likely, yes, but it depends on your camera,. I think the latest version of ACR will only install in CS4,.. ? (ie CS3 won't support a camera that comes out next week.)


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)

13,206 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?
Register to forums
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 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is kubo456
910 guests, 262 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

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.