RailPictures.Net Forums

RailPictures.Net Forums (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photo Processing Forum (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=15)
-   -   JPEGS and RAW (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=12581)

Freericks 08-18-2010 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd (Post 119668)
I understand all the advantages (more accurate pixel values, not limited to 8 bit gamma compression, ability to use different demosaicing algorithms, etc), they just don't really effect this boy and his cheap camera / lenses. :D

Most people shoot RAW because it's forgiving. Mis-guided or not, it's a fact. It's plan B when you bone a shot.

Loyd L.

Be still my beating heart.

Dennis A. Livesey 08-18-2010 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wirailfan (Post 119664)
I get a kick out of this response. I hear it from many people that don't understand the other advantages for keeping and using the RAW file. Although it is easier to adjust exposure and color, it is far from the only reason to shoot in RAW.

My response, while perhaps glib, was meant to be mnemonic.

It was not intended to be a treatise on the virtues of RAW. Since you have alluded to such knowledge, don't hold back, enlighten the OP.

Knowledge not shared only dies.

travsirocz 08-19-2010 01:51 AM

I shoot in raw because I use a upper end DSLR. I don't own L glass to try and attach to a point and shoot either. If you are using higher end equipment why wouldn't you use a higher end image file? If your reasoning is that you only use the images online then why are you shooting with such expensive equipment? As Thomas said, most just don't get what a raw file really is. A raw file is everything your camera can do.

Joe the Photog 08-19-2010 06:37 PM

To me, not shooting in RAW is like shooting print film and then throwing away the negative. I know there are some folks who do not shoot RAW and get great images. I'm not here to beat the RAW drum all day long. Do what you guys want. But the most irritating comments in these debates are the implication that folks only shoot RAW to fix in post what should have ben done right in camera. Sure. Whatever.

Dennis A. Livesey 08-19-2010 09:24 PM

I've shot RAW since I got my first DSLR, a 20D in 2006. I have done so because I want all that the camera can give me in image quality. I didn't want to lose anything by having the camera throw information away. And I want the flexibility that RAW gives me in post.

During shooting, I don't want add to my workload and have to make decisions about "landscape" or "portrait" or whatever while the loco blasts by in perfect light. In the heat of a chase I just want to concentrate on creative decisions and not worry about settings. So I set the camera to Manual and on neutral settings over all, then reduce the technical variables to ISO, shutter, aperture. I then spend more time shooting fleeting moments than "fiddling."

At home where I can relax and study the image, I can make a full range of choices regarding light, color, contrast.

I love working with a big fat file. You have the benefit of really clean retouching.

(As an aside, working with 70 MB files from my 35 mm neg scans has been very luxurious in how smooth all processing looks.)

I shoot RAW for maximum control of my images. Not because I am sloppy.

wirailfan 08-20-2010 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog (Post 119740)
To me, not shooting in RAW is like shooting print film and then throwing away the negative. I know there are some folks who do not shoot RAW and get great images. I'm not here to beat the RAW drum all day long. Do what you guys want. But the most irritating comments in these debates are the implication that folks only shoot RAW to fix in post what should have ben done right in camera. Sure. Whatever.

Nicely said Joe. My thoughts exactly.

As far as enlightening the OP, a quick search of the forums will provide plenty of information for and against RAW, including my own thoughts. Google it and you will find more information than you can find time to read.

I started shooting RAW with my Canon 10D right before I upgraded to a 20D. My only regret is that I didn't start with RAW day one with digital. All that older power I shot that is long gone and I only have a JPEG file to show for it. What a shame.

norfolksouthern 08-24-2010 06:50 AM

That's interesting as somehow most time I using JPEGS everytime often. And, sometime I switch go with small from large with JPEGS for a balance of numbers.

- David

Joe the Photog 08-24-2010 11:34 AM

Not shooting RAW is a choice. Not shooting the highest JPEG possible every single time is just not smart. It gives you way more cropping area if you need it, but it also gives you a bigger picture to print if you choose to or to submit to magazines when you get to that level.

socalrailfan 09-22-2010 01:59 AM

JPG! And everytime I've posted comparisions here, everyone thought my JPG images were in fact RAW, oops!!!

travsirocz 09-22-2010 02:02 AM

I convert everything to PNG files.

Mgoldman 09-22-2010 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travsirocz (Post 121670)
I convert everything to PNG files.

Why PNG? What is PNG, I can't recall.

I convert to TIFF since that is the format which most magazines and the occasional client may prefer and it is lossless.

The resolution I save files is 2400 X 3600 at 300 dpi.
I've been thinking maybe I should save at a higher res though that seems
suitable for enlargements up to 20X30.

/Mitch

travsirocz 09-22-2010 02:37 AM

Its simple, web friendly, HTML awesome, and doesn't take up much space on thee ole hard drive.

norfolksouthern 10-16-2010 04:49 PM

Um, so that's why most time I using JPEGS on my Canon 50D often.

- David


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:27 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.