RAW vs JPEG

aim&shoot

Ok after reading a few (lots) of post regarding raw and jpeg, I am still confused / lost... I don't know what to shoot now, from reading it sounds like RAW is the best way to go, but than JPEG is easier to deal with...

I will shoot whatever get's me the best resolution / pixels.

Well I guess I can take the pic but after that is what worries me, I want to make sure when I download the pics and do whatever adjustments or effects to the pic that I don't loose any resolution or anything that will affect the picture if it's decided to enlarge that pic to a 11x14 or even 20x24.

So what should I do, or what is the best? Thanks in advance...

aktse

aim&shoot wrote:

Ok after reading a few (lots) of post regarding raw and jpeg, I am still confused / lost... I don't know what to shoot now, from reading it sounds like RAW is the best way to go, but than JPEG is easier to deal with...

I will shoot whatever get's me the best resolution / pixels.

Better depends on what you're going to do and your workflow (if you have one).

I treat raw files as my underdeveloped digital negatives. There's a ton of info out there, including a wiki about it. Many people prefer RAW because it gives them final control over the image and the extra cushion to save one/two stops if the exposure is off.

RAW files are much, much bigger (not compressed) and your fps usually drops.

jpgs are "developed" by the camera's algorithm and are compressed files.

You can edit both of them, but you have more flexibility with RAW files.

And there are people out there that only shoot in jpg because they can nail the exposure in camera and make any adjust they want in jpg.

aim&shoot

aktse wrote:

Better depends on what you're going to do and your workflow (if you have one).

I treat raw files as my underdeveloped digital negatives. There's a ton of info out there, including a wiki about it. Many people prefer RAW because it gives them final control over the image and the extra cushion to save one/two stops if the exposure is off.

RAW files are much, much bigger (not compressed) and your fps usually drops.

jpgs are "developed" by the camera's algorithm and are compressed files.

You can edit both of them, but you have more flexibility with RAW files.

And there are people out there that only shoot in jpg because they can nail the exposure in camera and make any adjust they want in jpg.

Hmmmm... Well I really don't have a workflow yet, I have just been shooting in jpeg and downloading to a DVD to save the pics and backup online... But these are just play shots and my kiddos...

But now I am doing my nieces 15th shots and I am trying to learn a bit more because out of those shots there are going to be a few enlargements prob. 20x24. So let's just say I am new to it all, and don't know where to start! I come from shooting nothing but film to shooting DSLR now...

Thanks

Scott_Quier

aim&shoot wrote:

Hmmmm... Well I really don't have a workflow yet, I have just been shooting in jpeg and downloading to a DVD to save the pics and backup online... But these are just play shots and my kiddos...

But now I am doing my nieces 15th shots and I am trying to learn a bit more because out of those shots there are going to be a few enlargements prob. 20x24. So let's just say I am new to it all, and don't know where to start! I come from shooting nothing but film to shooting DSLR now...

Thanks

OK, this is your first serious shoot. It's a once in a lifetime event. You can't afford to goof up the exposure or the white balance or ...

Unless your are 100% sure you can get nail the exposure (+/- about 1/2 stop) and the WB (are there flourscent lights where you will be shooting? If so, you won't be able to nail the WB). There is only one course you can take ... shoot RAW.

When you get them home, you can quickly run the RAW files through the converter that came with your camera to produce JPG files (these are PROOFS as far as your client is concerned ) to keep your client happy while you figure out the next step .... how to edit them to produce high-quality photographs. Many times it's not much more than fixing the exposure (if it's off), setting the WB (make sure you have a good WB calibration tool - a gray target), boosting saturation and contrast, and cropping to taste - bang! Done.

The reason for RAW is to CYA in the event you forget to pay attention to your histogram or you forget to take some test shots to get the exposure settings right ... The RAW file is a big safety net - much bigger than is afforded by a JPG file.

So, you've decided to shoot RAW - I know you have because you're smart and you think I might know what I'm talking about deal Anyway, you need to do a quick test. Insert a card into your camera and format it. Set your camera to capture in RAW. Check out the number of exposures the camera thinks it can fit onto your card. Divide that number into the number of photos you think you will be taking and now multiply that number by the size of the card you formatted. Take that result and add at least 10% to it - you might be better off if you add 50% to it. That is the amount of memory you need to have in your possession by the time you get to the event.

It's a religious question whether that memory should come as a bunch of small cards or a smaller number of really large cards. I like to have no more than about 200 images on a card. Each photographer must decide for themselves how many eggs they want to have in a single basket.

aim&shoot

Thanks Scott - you have been so very helpful.

Yes most of the pics will be flourescent lighting and than of course the church that prob. will not allow flash. But I do have a pretty sturdy Tripod that should help tremendously there...

The good thing is that her 15 is not til next year (so I have some time), but I have 2 other events that I asked if I could take pics in order to practice everything I am learning... And the first one is in April. They understand I am learning adn I am just a second shooter, so I don't have to be to worried, but I do want them to come out good, well prefer GREAT, but good it ok for now, as long as I don't screw up too much..

So, what about shooting Raw+Jpeg is that a good idea or not?

Thanks again for all your input and help.

Anthony

I invariably liken the raw image to a 'digital negative' because it is easy to relate the various steps and processes one with another. It's not a perfect analogy but it serves us pretty well.

In the past have you processed your own negatives? If not, would you like to have done if it had been practical to do so? Or maybe you made your own prints? Or would have liked to? Raw is the way to go with this experience or aspiration in the digital age.

Learning the processes to develop negatives and to produce prints took some time and effort, although it was perfectly possible for anyone to achieve better-than-average results; no PhDs required. In many ways raw processing is similar: it takes some time and effort to learn the various controls and what they do in whatever raw processor you have be it the one which came with your camera, or something like Adobe Camera Raw (ACR).

The good thing is that you can 'dip your toes in the water'. The first thing could be to shoot raw+jpeg, assuming you camera has this setting. Okay, it takes up more memory card space, but so what. You then have a jpeg for comfort and a raw images with which to experiment and use to produce enhanced quality pictures. Or, shoot raw and save out a set of jpegs (Scott mentioned this earlier in the thread - a good point, well made).

We have to accept that cameras simply do not see things as we do or alternatively how we would want to see them. Having maximum flexibility in our own hands to try and re-create the moment must surely be the aim of every photographer?

Anthony.

PS. so busy scribbling away with this response that you posted to Scott in the mean while! See my comment about the Raw + Jpeg, which I would add I think of as a bridge or transition phase to just using raw.

aim&shoot

Thanks Anthony - very helpful....

I think I will play around a bit with the RAW + JPEG and see how they turn out and play around with RAW and processing it all the fun stuff....

I would rather have more memory cards than needed to play around with.

Scott_Quier

aim&shoot wrote:

Thanks Scott - you have been so very helpful.

Yes most of the pics will be flourescent lighting and than of course the church that prob. will not allow flash. But I do have a pretty sturdy Tripod that should help tremendously there...

The good thing is that her 15 is not til next year (so I have some time), but I have 2 other events that I asked if I could take pics in order to practice everything I am learning... And the first one is in April. They understand I am learning adn I am just a second shooter, so I don't have to be to worried, but I do want them to come out good, well prefer GREAT, but good it ok for now, as long as I don't screw up too much..

So, what about shooting Raw+Jpeg is that a good idea or not?

Thanks again for all your input and help.

If you have the memory, this is not a bad idea. However, something to take into consideration is that the two files increases the amount of time needed to write each image to the card. If your camera buffer can support that - like when you are taking a sequence of shots - then this is a good idea. However, if you have a slower camera, then minimizing the number of files written to the card my be a better idea.

Were it me, especially with the time you have available to you and the lack of pressure to deliver, I think I would skip the RAW+JPG and jump in with both feet. But that's just reckless me:D

aim&shoot

Ok...

I was outside playing with the camera and placed it in raw+jpeg and the response was not that slow, but I am hesitant in low light setting's... So I have downloaded the trial versions of photoshop and lightroom, to see how much I can play with both....

I will get this, (of course with everyone's so helpful responses)...

Thanks