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 Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 23 Aug 2014 (Saturday) 12:39
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

RAW vs JPEG

 
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,482 posts
Likes: 199
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Aug 28, 2014 04:05 |  #46

Some people write poems - Dylan Thomas would spend weeks deciding on a single word. Some people write novels, one every three, four years. John Creasey used half a dozen pen names, employed a team of assistants and knocked out 20 thrillers a year. Some people write technical manuals and the boss is going to get antsy if it's not ready at the end of the week. Some people write for the newspaper and have a 9:00 PM deadline every evening. Some teenage girls write embarrassingly intimate fantasies in locked diaries and others write the same words on Facebook. And some people write grocery lists that they stick up on the refrigerator.

Sound familiar?


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
yogestee
"my posts can be a little colourful"
Avatar
13,845 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 36
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Australia
     
Aug 28, 2014 04:45 |  #47

I shoot both but never at the same time, depending on the circumstances. Both have their advantages and disadvantages.


Jurgen
50D~700D~EOS M~G11~S95~GoPro Hero4 Silver
http://www.pbase.com/j​urgentreue (external link)
The Title Fairy,, off with her head!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,021 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1629
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Aug 28, 2014 05:23 |  #48

LincsRP wrote in post #17121525 (external link)
I can and do. Yes they are called jpegs and I set the parameters in the camera before I press the shutter button. This begs the question: why does any amateur suggest they're not good enough or don't have the time to get it right? If you have the time then fiddle with the plastic box called a camera and if you're a pro you'll pre-set your box with the right settings, surely?

Personally there is NO WAY that I can set the box and get the images I WANT from the box. I couldn't even do it with a 1Dx. Actually I can't even do it using Canon's DPP software. DPP seems to want to do mostly the same thing to the highlight detail that the "box" does.

To get the results that I want I need to make an exposure suited to BOTH the subject, and the RAW processing software of my choice, Adobe Process Version 2012, only then I can achive the images that I want. Well if everything else also works out OK too of course.

Yes there are a few occasions where in camera JPEG is the answer. Mostly where instant or almost instant results are needed. These are generally also proffesional type situations, "events" where you are selling directly to the customer. Or time limited news stories. So I do get that. Mostly though where you have time to go back to base and pull images from the card you can get a JPEG converted from a RAW to the same standard with virtually no effort. This is particularly true for Canon where DPP will by default give you the same output as the camera conversion. With the added benefit of future RAW processor advances improving current results. A win win situation.

I have images, shot with my 300D, which were not keepers at the time because I was working in difficult conditions, which the latest RAW processor allows to be converted almost perfectly. Direct from camera JPEGS would have been useless then, and still be useless now.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LincsRP
Senior Member
427 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 40
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Lincolnshire,UK
     
Aug 28, 2014 09:36 |  #49

BigAl007 wrote in post #17122255 (external link)
Personally there is NO WAY that I can set the box and get the images I WANT from the box. I couldn't even do it with a 1Dx. Actually I can't even do it using Canon's DPP software. DPP seems to want to do mostly the same thing to the highlight detail that the "box" does.

To get the results that I want I need to make an exposure suited to BOTH the subject, and the RAW processing software of my choice, Adobe Process Version 2012, only then I can achive the images that I want. Well if everything else also works out OK too of course.

Yes there are a few occasions where in camera JPEG is the answer. Mostly where instant or almost instant results are needed. These are generally also proffesional type situations, "events" where you are selling directly to the customer. Or time limited news stories. So I do get that. Mostly though where you have time to go back to base and pull images from the card you can get a JPEG converted from a RAW to the same standard with virtually no effort. This is particularly true for Canon where DPP will by default give you the same output as the camera conversion. With the added benefit of future RAW processor advances improving current results. A win win situation.

I have images, shot with my 300D, which were not keepers at the time because I was working in difficult conditions, which the latest RAW processor allows to be converted almost perfectly. Direct from camera JPEGS would have been useless then, and still be useless now.

Alan

Understand you fully, Alan. However, I do find the DPP software does not duplicate the camera exactly. For instance noise control. I have found the jpegs from the raw converter can be more noisy than those at the same setting from the camera.

As the article mentions jpegs have got better these last few years but, that in itself is not why I shoot jpegs. I'm much happier spending longer behind the camera to perfect the composition and lighting than brushing up my pp skills. If I want to play with an image (a very rare occurrence) I convert to .tiff and then back to jpeg or print from the .tiff file.

My mechanic once said to me after servicing my car (comment about his trainee) "he's a wizard with the tools but, I wouldn't let him drive my kids pedal cart as he's dangerous behind the wheel" Rather sums up my pp skills :lol:


Steve
www.lincsracephotos.co​.uk (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LincsRP
Senior Member
427 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 40
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Lincolnshire,UK
     
Aug 28, 2014 09:46 |  #50

Dan Marchant wrote in post #17121956 (external link)
It really is horses for course though. You are shooting bulk documentary images where capturing each event participant is what is important. You could certainly make those images look artistically better by shooting RAW and post processing but that would be totally unrealistic time wise for the type of work you are doing. Of course you could also shoot RAW, apply a preset and hit export and get images that are just as good with basically no post processing time. That is what I do when I shoot Rugby - http://danmarchant.com​/2014/04/gfi-hkfc-rugby-tens/ (external link).

Nice images there Dan. I know out on the pitch there you suffer some horrible contrast which you cannot control. Raw, I imagine is an image saver in those conditions.

Some users of the DR controls in their cameras have reported exceptional shadow recovery recently. Now with that and highlight tone protection is available does a very good job of handling the severe contrast.


Steve
www.lincsracephotos.co​.uk (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sjones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,233 posts
Likes: 200
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
     
Aug 28, 2014 12:04 as a reply to  @ LincsRP's post |  #51

Post processing is part of photography; it is not a separate operation. With black & white in particular, it is often an integral, if not the most important, part of the overall photographic process.

And manipulating parameters in camera is, philosophically, no different then manipulating sliders in Photoshop; both are forms of post processing since their desired effects occur after the initial exposure.

If what the camera provides is sufficient for one’s desired output and creativity, then that’s fine. If not, then there are other avenues, such as Photoshop, to help the photographer reach his or her vision.


July 2018-July 2019 (external link)
It's the Photographer (external link) | God Loves Photoshop (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DoughnutPhoto
Senior Member
513 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 21
Joined Aug 2014
Location: the Netherlands
     
Aug 28, 2014 13:21 |  #52

I love these threads as it makes you wonder about things that you take for granted at one point. Just why do I shoot RAW?

Well, it suits my camera gear and shooting style. I can set up both my cameras the same way and I can control them the same way... meaning I can control them in the field the same way. (sometimes, I actually mistake one or the other when I look at the top LCD). If I were to shoot JPEG and use presets, I would have to dive into the presets and that would make me crazy ;).

My shooting style can be very ad hoc and I need my gear to support that. I might see something and take a picture immediately - i wouldn't want to have to set up settings left and right and find the moment to be gone. So, I am usually shooting in aperture mode. When I get to a location, I'll use exposure compensation and the histogram to nearly blow out the sky. That will make the most of my dynamic range.

After that's done, I can keep my settings the same most of the time, I will need to change them when conditions change a lot (going inside, sun setting, and so on). RAW helps me draw out more details and while its a bit embarassing, I might neglect to correct my settings when I go inside. With RAW, I can still get loads of details from those shots.


Canon 5d, 60d, 17-40mm L, 30mm Art, 50mm, 85mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
panicatnabisco
Senior Member
Avatar
972 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 325
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Mountain View, CA
     
Aug 29, 2014 03:25 |  #53

Luckless wrote in post #17121018 (external link)
Better yet, why spend all that time doing work IF you are getting paid? If you can do less work and still get paid the same, then it makes sense to do as little as you actually need and move on to the next project.

Because you ARE getting paid for it


Canon 1DX III | 1DX | 6D II | 6D | 16-35/2.8 II | 24-70/2.8 II | 35/1.4 II | 50/1.8 | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 85/1.4 IS | 100/2.8 IS macro | 200mm f/2 | 400/2.8 IS II | 2xIII
Leica M8.2 | Noctilux 50 f/1 | Elmarit 90/2.8
afimages.net (external link) | Facebook (external link) | instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Aug 29, 2014 03:55 |  #54

panicatnabisco wrote in post #17123994 (external link)
Because you ARE getting paid for it

But unless he charge by the hour, a workflow that speeds up the post-processing gives a better salary.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luckless
Goldmember
3,064 posts
Likes: 187
Joined Mar 2012
Location: PEI, Canada
     
Aug 29, 2014 07:00 |  #55

panicatnabisco wrote in post #17123994 (external link)
Because you ARE getting paid for it

You are getting paid to provide the customer with images of a quality that they will be happy with. If you can do that with an hour's work vs six hour's work, then why on earth would you want to use the method that took much more than an hour? Sure, going a little over the top on a regular basis can help grow your business if it means constantly showing a significant bump in quality, but when you are in business you deliver what you are being paid to do.

Constantly spending far more time and effort than required by the job at hand to release a 'slightly better that hardly anyone is going to actually notice the difference in' product is a great way to stay poor if not go out of business.


Canon EOS 7D | EF 28 f/1.8 | EF 85 f/1.8 | EF 70-200 f/4L | EF-S 17-55 | Sigma 150-500
Flickr: Real-Luckless (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
panicatnabisco
Senior Member
Avatar
972 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 325
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Mountain View, CA
     
Aug 29, 2014 12:00 |  #56

Because I actually care about my craft and not deliver some half baked snaps because it took too long to process it. Clients hire me because they like my style and workflow so when I shoot their weddings, events, portraits, engagements, etc. I'm going to use the same care I put into all my photos on my portfolio. I don't settle for 'good enough' SOOC jpegs and im sure my clients wont either.

Luckless wrote in post #17124136 (external link)
Constantly spending far more time and effort than required by the job at hand to release a 'slightly better that hardly anyone is going to actually notice the difference in' product is a great way to stay poor if not go out of business.

I dont underestimate my client's ability to see the difference, doing that will make me poor


Canon 1DX III | 1DX | 6D II | 6D | 16-35/2.8 II | 24-70/2.8 II | 35/1.4 II | 50/1.8 | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 85/1.4 IS | 100/2.8 IS macro | 200mm f/2 | 400/2.8 IS II | 2xIII
Leica M8.2 | Noctilux 50 f/1 | Elmarit 90/2.8
afimages.net (external link) | Facebook (external link) | instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
20droger
Cream of the Crop
14,685 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Dec 2006
     
Aug 29, 2014 12:42 as a reply to  @ panicatnabisco's post |  #57

Besides, if one doesn't do one's very best for each and every client, one will gain a reputation for less than perfect work, and business will suffer accordingly.

As is well known, 10% of the work results in 90% of the product. The remaining 90% of the work results in the remaining 10% of the product. If you only give clients 90% of the product, they will know. They may not be able to point out exactly what's wrong, but the will know something is wrong.

There is a huge difference between a perfect product and an almost perfect product. Underestimating one's clients is a sure way to a bad reputation, and a bad reputation will take one a long way down the road to bankruptcy court.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luckless
Goldmember
3,064 posts
Likes: 187
Joined Mar 2012
Location: PEI, Canada
     
Aug 29, 2014 14:44 |  #58

panicatnabisco wrote in post #17124685 (external link)
Because I actually care about my craft and not deliver some half baked snaps because it took too long to process it. Clients hire me because they like my style and workflow so when I shoot their weddings, events, portraits, engagements, etc. I'm going to use the same care I put into all my photos on my portfolio. I don't settle for 'good enough' SOOC jpegs and im sure my clients wont either.

I dont underestimate my client's ability to see the difference, doing that will make me poor

There is a huge difference between 'half baked snaps', and 'doing a suitable job without wasting additional effort for no additional gain'.

Work I'm not getting paid on is work I can spend additional time on to try different things. If I'm getting paid for something then I am going to do the most efficient job for it that I can, and ideally the least amount of time and effort on my part to meet the expectations of the job.


Canon EOS 7D | EF 28 f/1.8 | EF 85 f/1.8 | EF 70-200 f/4L | EF-S 17-55 | Sigma 150-500
Flickr: Real-Luckless (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
panicatnabisco
Senior Member
Avatar
972 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 325
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Mountain View, CA
     
Aug 29, 2014 15:18 |  #59

True, but I never see it as a waste. It feels like its a limiting factor if I stick to a comfortable process on any type of work I do, but I do agree if i'm just shooting for fun I can spend additional time and try different things. Why not do it with every situation? Plateauing is one of my worst fears since its easy and tempting to fall into it. I push to be better with every workflow I do, even if it takes hours. It pays off (very heftily) in the end


Canon 1DX III | 1DX | 6D II | 6D | 16-35/2.8 II | 24-70/2.8 II | 35/1.4 II | 50/1.8 | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 85/1.4 IS | 100/2.8 IS macro | 200mm f/2 | 400/2.8 IS II | 2xIII
Leica M8.2 | Noctilux 50 f/1 | Elmarit 90/2.8
afimages.net (external link) | Facebook (external link) | instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,585 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 6446
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Aug 29, 2014 15:20 |  #60

I shoot raw for only one reason, control.....




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

8,294 views & 0 likes for this thread
RAW vs JPEG
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
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 was a spammer, and banned as such!
980 guests, 344 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.