Jpeg Shooters only!

Hi John...


PM sent!

samsen wrote in post #6032792
If you know what you do, jpg or raw serve you equally well.

Thank you for your comment...

That's just what I needed to hear as I'm seeing it here firsthand...

I know in time my newbie-ism will be overtaken by experience because I LOVE to practice anything I want to be good at...In time and with much EFFORT I will be NAILING it in-camera...And my personal philosophy is...If I couldn't NAIL it in-camera then I don't deserve to have it...

Its just my PERSONAL opinion about it and it suits me fine...I don't think my aspirations are too difficult at all and they are self-implaced so no probs there...Everyone shoots for different reasons and I have mine and others will have theirs...

I'm glad there's no one right way as I was never one to want to try to fit anyone's "MOLD", in shape or beliefs...

I think it's great if you shoot JPG and NAILING it in-camera, and not having to do *any* post processing afterwards. But if you plan on doing it anyways (even if it's "pretty good") then you are just limiting yourself. This is especially true if you ever plan on doing weddings or really IMPORTANT things where RAW might mean the difference between saving a shot or it being screwed.

There really isn't that much of a learning curve with RAW. I don't know what to say.. programs like ACR and Lightroom make it very easy- and this applies to doing multiple photos as well. Adobe Bridge is the easiest program that I've ever used. Just open up your RAW files, then click on "open in camera RAW", then do your basic WB, tone, and exposure adjustments. When you're done just save or export as JPG and you are done.

Those who are making arguments about JPG being just as good as RAW but who have not even TRIED RAW are just making excuses not to learn IMO. If you want to be the best photographer you can be you should at least have a basic understanding of how to edit RAW files. It's the same difference as shooting in M or leaving it in green box mode.

Reverend DSatanic,
The RAW choir is in the other thread. The one that's called "Why I shoot RAW and think anyone who doesn't is a idiot!"
Go shoot some JPEGs' and show us how terrible they are.

Dstanic is certainly not preaching. The OP is looking for good advice. Advising him that jpg is just as good as RAW is misleading him. As long as he knows, going in, that with an over or under exposed jpg he could experience the "nothing can be done" problem. Those of you who never over or under expose anything. Hard to believe. If you ever use a flash, you are going to, sooner or later, need the range of RAW.
A jpg does not hold the same amount of data as a RAW file and you are giving the OP bad advice if you tell him it does. We can all do as we wish but we should give a novice accurate, thorough advice.
I think you will find that with tools like "highlight and shadow" in CS3 and the recovery and fill light sliders in ACR, the RAW file is more valuable to us than ever.
Telling the person to go ahead a stay with jpg is like telling an aviator that a jet will be much more than he could ever really use.

booju wrote in post #6038538
I'm not interested in this at all...sorry.....Maybe you need to start a thread on your own as mine is SPECIFICALLY targeted for JPEG shots that have been processed...Thanks

You must be reading a different thread than me.
This is what I was saying, and the OP also.

DAMphyne wrote in post #6037317
Shot about an hour ago, only re-size.

BTW, I forgot to thank you for posting your images for me to review...GOOD JOB and I appreciate it...

Oh gosh. I'm sorry my take on it doesn't interest you. My opinion still stands. No reason at all to shoot JPG if you plan to post process. If you want to see post processed JPGs, you might as well be asking to see RAW files with basic processing. No difference at all, except that you have a different file extension.

My reply had no intent to cause you grief...

Simply it was the politest way I knew how to say that my thread is topic SPECIFIC as to JPEG shots out of camera and post-processed...Its my TOPIC that I want to review through the help of these contributors...No more and no less...

Please don't be dis-heartened as I said...

No hard feelings HERE...

I am invisible too.
booju....you are short changing yourself

good luck

I am not sure why I am having a hard time getting my point across. I fully get the intent of your thread, what I'm trying to say is that the answer to your question isn't really telling you much. It's showing you that JPGs can look fine when processed. We already knew that for sure.

If you could see unprocessed JPGs, you would be able to see that you'll probably want to do processing that is pretty comparable to RAW, but unlike with JPG, if you shoot RAW, you can take it in whatever direction you'd like. RAW isn't for people who just have this burning desire to take the PP way too far. I was just trying to say that most JPG people here process their JPGs just as much as RAW people do.

Shooting RAW is like icing on the cake, especially if you're going to process anyway. Since you specifically said you were going to PP, I'm trying to be logical about the fact that JPG is really only the best option for people who want to do NO processing at all.

booju wrote in post #6038538
I'm not interested in this at all...sorry.....Maybe you need to start a thread on your own as mine is SPECIFICALLY targeted for JPEG shots that have been processed...Thanks

And I'm not worried about storage space either but more in the fact that I didn't want to put any more time in learning any more PP stuff, i.e., converting RAW files and the like...I'm not a computer lover nor a savvy in using these software programs...That's my issue...I've been reading and reading about RAW here and all I see is mass CONFUSION when people are in the LEARNING CURVE of using RAW....I'd rather pass on the HYSTERIA as I feel I don't need to OVER_PROCESS my photos for the type of images I'm looking for mainly SH, Sharpening, USM, and cropping....If I was wanting more flexibility in my photos and demanded to do a variety of skilled adjustments for the effect then I would most definitely seek to LEARN to process RAW images...I wish I was SMART and a lot more INTELLIGENT at learning technical stuff but I gotta be REAL...I ain't the most computer intelligent computer savvy guy I wished I were....

HOWEVER, if someone could personally guide and instruct me with a well-written tutorial that I could EASILY follow...I would most CERTAINLY appreciate it and would even offer to pay them for their time for a modest price....I really want to LEARN but I'm a type of guy who needs to follow a DETAILED outline that has some parameters to follow...That's the only REASON for NOT going RAW...I'm just tired of being confused and reading so many contradictions from people who are experienced that its been really difficult for a NOVICE soft-brained guy like me to determine much from it...And then I get super FRUSSSSS-TRATED....

Could you or any other EXPERIENCED PROVEN MEMBER here help me out in this manner...I would go RAW right this minute with that type of written DETAILED outline and guidance...I want to shoot RAW desperately but again I find myself lacking in trying to assess the manifold contradictions I read...

A step by step RAW detailed outline for DUMMIES is what I need....STEP by STEP...I'm the kind of guy you had in class that needed the teacher to DRAW a picture....But once I see a picture that's it...as I got lots of RAW TALENT as an artist but don't have the comprehension skill level I would like to have had in addressing technical things...

Someone PLEASE help me if you are able to as its my desire to LEARN...

PM me if you'd like ....

I would be more than comfortable spliiting between the both of you what I was willing to pay for a highly-detailed step-by-step instructional outline of every adjust and every numerical setting or the parameters of each and every click I need to make in conc=verting and processing a RAW FILE...I was willing to [pay $35 but since the both of you have been persistent I'd rather applaud both of your efforts and SPLIT it down the middle @ $17.50 each///One can make me for ACR and the other for DPP...And instead of PMing me when you are done...I would like to DONATE it to the future NOOBS of this great POTN forum as a NOBEL GIFT in my name...

Give me a 30-day review so I can use it and see if its SATISFACTORY and I will post date both my checks for 30 days once in hand...

I appreciate your persistence and the need to implore me to do like you do and discover the adventure of RAW FILES...AS I said in the above quote on page 2 I truly want to learn...Just need someone like the two of you to teach me....Thanks! I'm looking forward to my first efforts...

The sarcasm is really not necessary. You can learn all you need to know by watching all the tutorials you care to watch at www.lynda.com. It'll cost you $25 a month, but you can easily learn how to import a RAW file and change the 4 or 5 major settings that the camera handles. Shouldn't take more than a couple days.

The point being made is that it is a lot easier to take a RAW file where you want it to go. It will also take less time. And give you a better product. We don't really care what you choose to shoot. We are honestly trying to help you. Either Andrea or myself could have written you a thorough description on converting RAW files in the time we have spent here. It is much faster to refer you to the wealth of information that is already out there. You could probably open ACR or DPP and do it yourself with very few problems. Keep your money.
Now...regarding shooting RAW....What software do you have?

DStanic wrote in post #6037082
I agree. I shoot in JPG some of the time, nothing wrong with it as long as you don't plan on doing alot of post processing afterwards. But if you do, why in the hell would you not take advantage of the wonderful thing called RAW?

I agree with this 100%.

That was very rude and uncalled for.

Kurt