RAW SHOOTING...

Wow.

After shooting DSLR's for the better part of eight years, this morning I finally shot my first few frames in RAW. I figured it was time; lemme' see what all the hubbub's about.

While nothing I shot this morning was anything even approaching impressive enough to want to share, I can certainly see where the benefits of RAW will be (one of which will not be the number of shots per CF card).

I don't know what the Hell I was so afraid of.

If I'm in a situtation where I need to take a lot of pictures, I may still shoot large jpg, just so I don't have to worry about swapping cards out. Aside from that, I'm gonna' go ahead and drink a nice big glass of RAW Kool Aid...

People are afraid of change. I was when I fist started shooting RAW. Luckily Canon (and Nikon) include RAW converter programs with DSLRs. It's VERY nice to be able to edit SO many things in a file without having to loose quality. That's the benefit of shooting RAW.

You could try shooting small JPG to save space on your CF card. If you want an image you will always have the RAW file.

Welcome to the RAW club. You should read some tutorials and watch some videos on how people "cook" their RAW files. It can give you ideas.

nate42nd wrote in post #14220623
You could try shooting small JPG to save space on your CF card. If you want an image you will always have the RAW file.

Dumb question: What's the benefit of keeping a small jpeg?

Yeah, I plan to. While I can certainly see where the many benefits will be, I realize it's going to take a little while before I start getting proficient with it...

The benefit of keeping a small JPG is:
1. Preview of the images before importing them to RAW software (which you may or may not need)
2. You have a small JPG to e-mail or post if you like it just the way it is. (Family snapshot...etc...)

Those are my reasons for a small JPG. I have started shooting ONLY RAW lately because I don't have much need for the small JPG.....and if I happen to need a small JPG I can simply make one from the RAW image.

Also : If you have never used Lightroom you may want to try it free. It works a lot better for me than does DPP.

Thanks.

I've tried Lightroom, and I am seriously not a fan of it...

BreitlingFan wrote in post #14220800
Thanks.

I've tried Lightroom, and I am seriously not a fan of it...

Lightroom is the most popular of the RAW convertors, among POTN membership...I know, because I started a poll on just that question. The ACR module (used with Photosho, as part of the Adobe Creative Suite) is #2, DPP is #3.
https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=13665896#po​st13665896

I surmise that either you are not accustomed to RAW conversion in general, or there is something about the LR user interface which strikes you wrong. Then try the free RAW convertor that Canon provides with every dSLR, DPP, as that will give you a basis of comparison for workflow and user interface. In general, more casual snapshooters find DPP to be desirable because it is designed to read the embedded picture style information that the camera puts into each RAW file's JPG preview image. But LR is the more powerful program, better for those with higher expectations.

BreitlingFan wrote in post #14220800
Thanks.

I've tried Lightroom, and I am seriously not a fan of it...

Lightroom is the program that allows me to shoot raw since it makes processing images so easy. I never shot raw before LR because it was too much work.

How much time did you spend with it and did you have any instruction or were you just poking around on your own?

Wilt wrote in post #14220860
Lightroom is the most popular of the RAW convertors, among POTN membership...I know, because I started a poll on just that question. The ACR module (used with Photosho, as part of the Adobe Creative Suite) is #2, DPP is #3.
https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=13665896#po​st13665896

Hey, reggae and hip hop are pretty popular, too. You'll find neither in my CD collection.

I won't argue whether or it's the most popular; clearly, it is. "Popular" doesn't equate to it being the right program for everyone, though...

I've tried LR, and didn't like it.

I'll leave it at that as opposed to addressing the remaining, and condescending, portions of your post...

mike_d wrote in post #14220870
Lightroom is the program that allows me to shoot raw since it makes processing images so easy. I never shot raw before LR because it was too much work.

How much time did you spend with it and did you have any instruction or were you just poking around on your own?

I downloaded a 30 day trial of it. While I didn't have any "instruction", per se, it just didn't seem intuitive to me. Importing this and exporting that seemed rather redundant to me...

BreitlingFan wrote in post #14221026
I downloaded a 30 day trial of it. While I didn't have any "instruction", per se, it just didn't seem intuitive to me. Importing this and exporting that seemed rather redundant to me...

LR is one of those programs that benefits GREATLY from having some instruction. I got Scott Kelby's book and read the first few chapters about setting it up before actually importing any pictures I cared about. Trying to use LR without some help is a little like trying to figure out a helicopter on your own. Its not pretty. But with training, its a very powerful tool.

BreitlingFan wrote in post #14221026
Hey, reggae and hip hop are pretty popular, too. You'll find neither in my CD collection.

I won't argue whether or it's the most popular; clearly, it is. "Popular" doesn't equate to it being the right program for everyone, though...

I've tried LR, and didn't like it.

I'll leave it at that as opposed to addressing the remaining, and condescending, portions of your post...

I downloaded a 30 day trial of it. While I didn't have any "instruction", per se, it just didn't seem intuitive to me. Importing this and exporting that seemed rather redundant to me...

The point of my post was that different strokes are for different folks, and I was not trying to be condescending, but merely reflecting the fact that different levels of user expectations and needs will make one product more suitable or another less suitable for them! The point of the popularity was merely a reflection of the relative desirability of the program. If you had said that you tried and disliked a different program, that dislike might have been reflected by the general unpopularity of the program among the POTN community. No need to take offense, I was merely providing commentary relative to your dislike, not trying to badmouth you! Calma, signore!

BreitlingFan wrote in post #14220800
Thanks.

I've tried Lightroom, and I am seriously not a fan of it...

What do you use? DPP?

Whatever software you like it's still good for your images to shoot RAW.

Wilt wrote in post #14221059
The point of my post was that different strokes are for different folks, and I was not trying to be condescending, but merely reflecting the fact that different levels of user expectations and needs will make one product more suitable or another less suitable for them! The point of the popularity was merely a reflection of the relative desirability of the program. If you had said that you tried and disliked a different program, that dislike might have been reflected by the general unpopularity of the program among the POTN community. No need to take offense, I was merely providing commentary relative to your dislike, not trying to badmouth you! Calma, signore!

Your post was clearly:

A) Calling into question what my expectations are
B) Call into question my level of overall photography expertise

My resume, while probably not as impressive as some here, is certainly beyond that of someone who would be considered a "casual snapshooter". I don't know why you would assume that "casual snapshooter" would describe me. You don't know the first thing about me, aside from the fact that I don't use Lightroom...

nate42nd wrote in post #14221071
What do you use? DPP?

Whatever software you like it's still good for your images to shoot RAW.

I'm using Photoshop Elements 9, and will be upgrading that to PSE 10...

BreitlingFan wrote in post #14221778
Your post was clearly:

A) Calling into question what my expectations are
B) Call into question my level of overall photography expertise

My resume, while probably not as impressive as some here, is certainly beyond that of someone who would be considered a "casual snapshooter". I don't know why you would assume that "casual snapshooter" would describe me. You don't know the first thing about me, aside from the fact that I don't use Lightroom...

I pointedly deny 100% your allegations. I was generalizing to make a point. If you wish to take it as a personal afront, then I will have to accept that I cannot make right and change your interpretation of the comment I made -- as an innocent and non-judgemental commetary about suitability of different products for different needs.