Can LR load RAW files?

djspinner2k

It seem to me that Lightroom only loads jpg files. I read some where that it supports Canon 30d raw files. but everytime i import files it only gives me the option of uploading jpg files.

the only way i can edit RAW files is with Photoshop. can someone tell me how to import my RAW files into LR? if it's at all possible.

Andy

it should just read them. I just do file>import>import from disk, and point to my folder where my raws are.

Please list out your exact steps what you are doing?

Are you referring to LR importing your RAWs, or are you referring to exporting. If exporting, exporting to disk, or to SmugMug?

djspinner2k

i guess that worked. but it dosen't seem to be any better the just working with a jpg picture. the raw picture is 8.5mb when i import it. then i resize it in LR and export a jpg. it exports the same size as it would if i import a jpg and export a resized jpg.

if that makes any sense

Andy

djspinner2k wrote:

i guess that worked. but it dosen't seem to be any better the just working with a jpg picture. the raw picture is 8.5mb when i import it. then i resize it in LR and export a jpg. it exports the same size as it would if i import a jpg and export a resized jpg.

if that makes any sense

? With RAW, you are working with ALL the original data - nothing is processed by the camera - you have much more ability to adjust exposure, white balance, color, curves, and sharpening. Can't do that so well with a pre-cooked jpg from the camera.

I'm wondering why you are resizing? What's your end goal?

djspinner2k

Andy wrote:

??? With RAW, you are working with ALL the original data - nothing is processed by the camera - you have much more ability to adjust exposure, white balance, color, curves, and sharpening. Can't do that so well with a pre-cooked jpg from the camera.

I'm wondering why you are resizing? What's your end goal?

i guess my end goal is to zoom in on one subject in my picture. and have it be enough resolution that I can make a big print like 8X10. if that makes sense.

ex. a raw image on my camera is 8.5mb and the same image in jpg is 4.5mb.

if i zoom in on half the image of an 8.5mb i should have 4.25mb and that big enough to be able to print really nice size picture. but thats not what i get when i convert to a jpg.

i am not sure if any of this makes sense. its getting late and i am getting tired. lol

jfriend

djspinner2k wrote:

i guess my end goal is to zoom in on one subject in my picture. and have it be enough resolution that I can make a big print like 8X10. if that makes sense.

ex. a raw image on my camera is 8.5mb and the same image in jpg is 4.5mb.

if i zoom in on half the image of an 8.5mb i should have 4.25mb and that big enough to be able to print really nice size picture. but thats not what i get when i convert to a jpg.

i am not sure if any of this makes sense. its getting late and i am getting tired. lol

What you need to maximize in order to zoom in and make an 8x10 is the number of pixels you have in your image and the amount of detail. A full resolution JPEG and a RAW file will basically exactly the same ability to do this because they will have the same number of pixels. So, using a RAW file won't really make much of a difference for this task. I would expect you to get about the same result as starting with a full resolution JPEG.

Further, comparing the file sizes between RAW and JPEG doesn't help for this purpose. They are different storage formats with different compression mechanisms. Those differences don't really affect what you are trying to do.

The key for what you are trying to do is the number of pixels. For example, shooting JPEG fine instead of JPEG medium would make a big difference, but starting with a RAW vs. a JPEG fine won't matter much because they have the same number of pixels.

Icebear

djspinner2k wrote:

ex. a raw image on my camera is 8.5mb and the same image in jpg is 4.5mb.

if i zoom in on half the image of an 8.5mb i should have 4.25mb and that big enough to be able to print really nice size picture. but thats not what i get when i convert to a jpg.

I think maybe you're mixing up two terms - megabytes and megapixels. Don't do that. Just before posting this reply, I took my 6MP Canon p&s and shot a white piece of paper. The 6MP image resulted in a 690kB jpeg file. It's all about the compression.

djspinner2k

Thanks guys.

That actually makes alot of sense now. I have a friend that was confused and was trying to confuse me. I feel like i have a better understanding now.

djspinner2k

I need more MP.:cry

jfriend

djspinner2k wrote:

I need more MP.:cry

The pure value of more MP is often overexaggerated. You would be surprised how good a quality enlargment print you can make from a relatively small number of MPs if the image is high quality (e.g. the pixels you have are good quality - sharp, properly exposed, good contrast, etc...). See this link for a list of Smugmug's minimum recommended number of pixels for a given enlargement size. When you crop to zoom in on a subject after-the-fact, check how many remaining pixels you have and compare it to this chart to get an idea for what size image you could print from it.