My first raw photo!

which is which?

i hope the one on the left if the 'after' picture

Assuming right is processed. Still could push the greens a bit more. Possibly a bit more sharpness in there too.

i would also bring down the saturation on the collar just a bit. other than that its good.

right is processed. its my first ever raw pic so thanks for all the feedback so far!

The wb seems a bit off on the processed one. Has too much of a yellow tint to it IMO.

Jay,

Congratulations on braving the world of RAW.

It's like having your own digital darkroom.

Shooting and processing in RAW is a bit like entering a beauty contest. Everyone will have their own opinion as to what looks good.

When you convert from RAW, if possible, I would suggest viewing your picture in as many venues as possible.

For example, print a picture, send a picture to a friend to see what it looks like on that person's screen, look on your own screen and preview it on this forum.

The thing is, no one computer/monitor, renders a picture the same way.

Probably a print is the most common denominator as you, and anyone else you show your print to, will view the same picture.

Hang in there.

Convert lots of RAW shots and most importantly,

Have fun.

westernminnguy wrote in post #9575782
Jay,

Congratulations on braving the world of RAW.

It's like having your own digital darkroom.

Shooting and processing in RAW is a bit like entering a beauty contest. Everyone will have their own opinion as to what looks good.

When you convert from RAW, if possible, I would suggest viewing your picture in as many venues as possible.

For example, print a picture, send a picture to a friend to see what it looks like on that person's screen, look on your own screen and preview it on this forum.

The thing is, no one computer/monitor, renders a picture the same way.

Probably a print is the most common denominator as you, and anyone else you show your print to, will view the same picture.

Hang in there.

Convert lots of RAW shots and most importantly,

Have fun.

thanks for the warm welcoming, i am taking much more photos in raw now!

jayseersts wrote in post #9575847
thanks for the warm welcoming, i am taking much more photos in raw now!

Good for you.

jayseersts wrote in post #9575847
thanks for the warm welcoming, i am taking much more photos in raw now!

yeah, it's addictive once you start! I'm not sure I'll ever shoot just jpgs again, I'm kicking myself I didn't start shooting RAW a long time ago!

Welcome to the downfall of your hard drive! Give it a couple k's worth of click's though and i'm sure you'll learn when its actually "needed". But hot damn is it an amazing leap in ease of post processing. Cheers!

Welcome to POTN.

I assume that the image on the left is the in-camera jpg that you are using for comparison. The quality of the end result depends on how the RAW converter is being applied to the image. The main thing to understand is that the default settings in any RAW converter are not the optimum settings. This is especially true for software that is designed to be used with all brands of cameras -- the default values are just an arbitrary starting place and not intended to be the final settings. If you use Photoshop and Adobe Camera RAW, the book that I really like is titled "Real World Adobe Camera RAW" by Fraser and Schewe. It gets down into the nitty gritty of the purpose of each adjustment and how to optimally use it. My gut feeling is that many new photographers who shoot RAW images rely on the converter's default values, but doing things that way will result in an image that is no better than the in-camera jpg and possibly not as good. Also, it isn't really a good practice to do things the way that I originally did when starting out shooting RAW images a few years ago -- randomly adjusting sliders to "see" if it made the image look better -- that technique often leads to frustration. While the free DPP that comes with the camera is fairly intuitive, even it benefits from a methodical workflow with a specific goal in mind for the final product. I am not sure about the best way to learn how to process RAW images, but very possibly is might be to do things the wrong way and then develop the desire to improve. That is probably the most common and effective approach to learning.

photomom2one wrote in post #9576067
yeah, it's addictive once you start! I'm not sure I'll ever shoot just jpgs again, I'm kicking myself I didn't start shooting RAW a long time ago!

yeah RAW is going to be fun to learn, hard tho!

denhamcla wrote in post #9576141
Welcome to the downfall of your hard drive! Give it a couple k's worth of click's though and i'm sure you'll learn when its actually "needed". But hot damn is it an amazing leap in ease of post processing. Cheers!

I got an external hard drive, lol!

Bill Boehme wrote in post #9576149
Welcome to POTN.

I assume that the image on the left is the in-camera jpg that you are using for comparison. The quality of the end result depends on how the RAW converter is being applied to the image. The main thing to understand is that the default settings in any RAW converter are not the optimum settings. This is especially true for software that is designed to be used with all brands of cameras -- the default values are just an arbitrary starting place and not intended to be the final settings. If you use Photoshop and Adobe Camera RAW, the book that I really like is titled "Real World Adobe Camera RAW" by Fraser and Schewe. It gets down into the nitty gritty of the purpose of each adjustment and how to optimally use it. My gut feeling is that many new photographers who shoot RAW images rely on the converter's default values, but doing things that way will result in an image that is no better than the in-camera jpg and possibly not as good. Also, it isn't really a good practice to do things the way that I originally did when starting out shooting RAW images a few years ago -- randomly adjusting sliders to "see" if it made the image look better -- that technique often leads to frustration. While the free DPP that comes with the camera is fairly intuitive, even it benefits from a methodical workflow with a specific goal in mind for the final product. I am not sure about the best way to learn how to process RAW images, but very possibly is might be to do things the wrong way and then develop the desire to improve. That is probably the most common and effective approach to learning.

Hey thanks for the book, ima go check that out tomorrow! Barnes and Noble, Here i come, again!

jayseersts wrote in post #9579108
Hey thanks for the book, ima go check that out tomorrow! Barnes and Noble, Here i come, again!

I just noticed that you used DPP and the book that I recommended is for Photoshop. However, the first three chapters of the book deal with RAW shooting and the concept of RAW images in general, so it is good background material even if not using Photoshop or Lightroom. There is documentation that came with DPP that will help with getting the best results from it, but without Photoshop, I would feel rather limited. Photoshop is not easy to learn and that is why many people do not bother with it. A simpler alternative for photographers is Adobe Lightroom. It contains the same Camera RAW conversion engine as Photoshop and also has the basic image editing tools that would be found in Photoshop. I have never used it, but that is what I have gathered from those who have. The book that I suggested would also be applicable to the RAW converter in Lightroom. This is a link to the book: Real World Camera RAW