When shooting RAW what do you do differently?

Stustaff

Ok I'm ready to learn more about RAW, I have found lots of info about what to do with a RAW image and how flexible etc it is and the better quality it gives and so on, What I have never found and though it would be good to create is some discussion on how you act when shooting with RAW as opposed to JPEG.

I mean literally if you were shooting a wedding/landscape etc in JPEG and then you shot the same thing in RAW what would you have done differently int terms of the actual set up of your camera etc

I know how to take a shot in JPEG but does RAW mean I should do things differently at the time of taking the shot?

AntoineD

Hi,

at first, I'd say : do not change your habits.

Me, let's say I forget all about the white balance : I shoot in the automatic mode. On my D200, I see few changes from one view to another so everything is okay on most cases.
Under tungsten light, I switch on Tungsten Balance. Then, through camera raw, I do few adjustments. This is particularly useful when shooting scenes with fluorescent lightings.

Generally, in jpeg, I'm totally stressed out while shooting RAW make me feel like I'm shooting film: don't worry, shoot as you feel it, there's more ways to solve issues than in jpeg.

Stustaff

Thanks for that its interesting you say "Generally, in jpeg, I'm totally stressed out while shooting RAW make me feel like I'm shooting film"

I have only ever shot seriously with Digital! so cant shoot like im shooting film!

Im trying to pick up and work out for example how you shoot and act when shooting RAW that differs to JPEG.

e.g what dont I have to worry about in RAW, can i take shots in less light than normal , that sort of stuff

AntoineD

Stustaff wrote:

Im trying to pick up and work out for example how you shoot and act when shooting RAW that differs to JPEG.

e.g what dont I have to worry about in RAW, can i take shots in less light than normal , that sort of stuff

Ok, let's say: if you're are a "rookie" into photography, don't worry during your shooting. Well: at first.

Try to edit a raw picture in a raw processing software, then you'll have a better idea about what you should try to do during the shooting, which may depend on what camera you have, too.

But, in fact, fixing a underexposed image in raw is way much easier than with a jpeg. It applies to over-exposed pictures, too.

Anyway, you definitely have to do it by yourself to understand the limits and the possibilities of shooting raw and what differs when doing so from shooting jpeg

Last but not least: I've said you can easily "fix" raw pictures, but, of course, the better way is to get the right exposure, the right white balance

wxwax

I willingly underexpose at times, to save the highlights, knowing I can adjust in RAW.

I don't worry much about getting the white balance right.

AntoineD

wxwax wrote:

I willingly underexpose at times, to save the highlights, knowing I can adjust in RAW.

Be carefull not to burst out the shadows, though

wxwax

AntoineD wrote:

Be carefull not to burst out the shadows, though

It's a balancing act. It's good to know you have 1-2 stops latitude in RAW.

colourbox

What I find freeing about RAW is that because so many things can now be changed after the shot without quality loss, you can concentrate just on the things that cannot be changed:

Is the shutter speed fast enough to freeze the action?
Is the depth of field the way I want it?
Is the composition cutting off anything I want in the picture?
Am I clipping shadows or highlights?
IS IT IN FOCUS?

Those are the things you can't fix in RAW. Everything else is negotiable later.

I do expose differently for RAW. For JPEG, I make it look right in the camera. For RAW, I am a disciple of Expose to the Right, always trying to push up against the right edge of the histogram without clipping the highlights. It makes the initial image look too light, but that's just what you want...to keep as much of the image as possible in the low-noise upper f/stops. My exposure compensation is set to +2 to start with and I only back off if the camera display indicates highlight clipping.

Stustaff

Ah ok thanks all, that gives me some good ideas to experiment with.

Im going to have a good play this weekend with RAW.

Antonio Correia

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=39930
This thread does have some interesting infos ...

Harryb

The biggest advantage for myself when shooting RAW is that I get to choose how I'm going to process my shot. When I shot in jpeg the camera would apply sharpening, set the WB, color saturation, etc. Most of those settings could not be corrected effectively in my post processing.

When I shoot now I have all of those setting set to 0 when I shoot and I then make those decisions during my processing of the shot.

The key for me in shooting RAW is in nailing the exposure and WB settings when I shoot. As long as I don't the blow the highlights, lose the detail in the shadow areas and don't blow a color channel I can get results that I'm satisfied with. Also there's very little to do in the shot processing when you nail the exposure and WB settings. The lower the ISO you shoot at the more flexibility you will have in your post processing.

01af

Stustaff wrote:

I know how to take a shot in JPEG but does raw mean I should do things differently at the time of taking the shot?

Yes, sure: bring more memory cards!

-- Olaf

Steve Cavigliano

wxwax wrote:

I willingly underexpose at times, to save the highlights, knowing I can adjust in RAW.

I don't worry much about getting the white balance right.

I sometimes willingly do the opposite. I over expose and blow some highlights, knowing I can rein them in during conversion. My goal is to get lots of data in that first histogram stop.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml


Like Sid, I also usually let the WB fall where it may, using Auto WB. Although, I will set a Custom WB for really odd temp lighting (indoor sports) when using RAW.


Steve

colourbox

Steve Cavigliano wrote:

I sometimes willingly do the opposite. I over expose and blow some highlights, knowing I can rein them in during conversion. My goal is to get lots of data in that first histogram stop.

Strictly speaking, Expose to the Right is never, ever about overexposure or blowing out highlights. It's only about loading up the first stop well.

Yes, some raw converters like ACR have highlight recovery, but there are some things it can't fix. Blown skin tones are especially hard to recover and still look good.

It's like the Price is Right...you want to make the highest bid without going over. I end up bracketing.

I can see your point if you're saying you let tones appear to blow out slightly in the camera histogram, because I do that too since it seems like my XT histogram is conservative. Some frames containing highlights that looked blown on camera weren't blown when opened in ACR. It might depend on what color space the camera histogram uses because you can clearly see in ACR that the point at which highlights blow shifts as you change the output color space.

Tee Why

In terms of camera setting, I generally leave the WB in Auto and adjust with the computer, second leave the JPEG setting in neutral with no increase in sharpness, contrast, or color as the histogram you see is a JPEG representation and altering JPEG settings will affect your histogram a bit.
I also turn off the noise reduction as it's better to do those with the computer as well. Some of the blown highlights in the LCD won't be blown out in RAW so if you clip things to the right a touch, that part will not be overexposed in RAW.

Lastly, learn to use a RAW processing program well.
I like RawShooter Premium and use it almost exclusively, but the more you are familiar with the program, you'll be able to get better results.

Stustaff

I have CS2, whats the advantage of say rawshooter or bibble etc over Adobes sofware?

Is it purely ease of use or is one piece of software able to give better output?