Shooting RAW vs Large Fine JPEG

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jimmy Smith, Jan 19, 2005.

  1. Jimmy Smith

    Jimmy Smith Guest

    I usually shoot Large Fine JPEG. The results seem fine and I seem to be
    able to alter the pix in Photoshop if I want to work on them. What are the
    benefits of shooting in RAW? I am using a Canon 10D.

    One more note. I don't like the name "RAW" for the shooting mode. It's
    kind of like getting the "Load" when I buy a mutual fund. I don't like the
    idea of shooting "RAW" and taking a "Load" from mutual funds.

    Thanks,

    Jimmy
     
    Jimmy Smith, Jan 19, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jimmy Smith

    eawckyegcy Guest

    Jimmy Smith trolls:
    www.google.com: "benefits of shooting raw"; 109 hits
     
    eawckyegcy, Jan 19, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jimmy Smith

    Hunt Guest

    Since you mentioning using PS for image work, your options are clear: TIFF, or
    RAW (regardless of the name). JPG is a lossy format. When you initially save
    to JPG in-camera, you have compressed the file. When you Save, or Save_As in
    PS to JPG you re-compress the file. A similar analogy would be a electrostatic
    copy (Xerox) of an electrostatic copy. You loose some info. TIFF uses your
    camera's settings for lossless file Save, while RAW saves all data for you to
    process as you see fit.

    Hunt
     
    Hunt, Jan 19, 2005
    #3
  4. Jimmy Smith

    Bill Hilton Guest

    I usually shoot Large Fine JPEG. The results seem fine and I seem to be
    You are still shooting RAW, you are just letting the camera convert the RAW
    into a JPEG for you based on the fixed set of parameters you've defined and
    then it tosses away the RAW file data. If you keep the RAW you can convert it
    many different ways, to JPEG with a variety of settings or TIFF or whatever.
    What you are doing is the film equivalent of giving your negs (raw files) to a
    lab (camera software), getting back prints (jpegs) from them and tossing away
    the negatives (raw files).

    The advantages of shooting JPEG are that the files are smaller and that it's
    more convenient if you want to skip the RAW conversion step. If you rarely
    have to edit your files, if your the white balance is always right (usually
    means you're shooting with flash in a studio), if you want to work with 8 bit
    instead of high bit files in Photoshop and if you're happy with the results you
    are getting now then there's no reason to switch to RAW, but the more you edit
    your files the more you appreciate the advantages of RAW.
     
    Bill Hilton, Jan 19, 2005
    #4
  5. Using just PS CS, I don't think I can go directly from RAW to JPEG [not
    that I want to]; have to pass Go, collect $200.00, and you're in a PSD
    file, easy enough to get to JPEG from there. But since I already have
    the file in PSD format, I tend to save that as the working "Master", and
    save only the best RAW files for future work.

    As of today, using Russell Brown's script, I think I may no longer shoot
    in RAW+ (+ = the addition of a jpeg to the RAW file) Seems to only take
    up room, and I have to move them out of the way to run the script anyway.
     
    John McWilliams, Jan 19, 2005
    #5
  6. Jimmy Smith

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Have you seen a shrink for the homophobia?

    If you want to preserve ALL the data the 10D collects, then shoot RAW.
    If your needs are less strengent, then the fine Jpeg may be just fine,
    and will certainly save space on your flash media. Your choice.
    If you are satisfied with the quality of your jpeg pictures, I see no
    strong reason to change.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jan 19, 2005
    #6
  7. Jimmy Smith

    YoYo Guest

    RAW is for those that can't take the photo right in the first place! This
    way they can correct the errors. However if you take the photo right in the
    first place jpeg is all you need and can print well above what most printers
    can print. The lossyless crap is only when you keep saving the file and
    changing the compression. But with beauty of digital its an option to make
    all happy.
     
    YoYo, Jan 19, 2005
    #7
  8. Jimmy Smith

    Mark B. Guest

    For me, the single biggest benefit is being able to adjust the white balance
    when converting. Ocassionally I have it set incorrectly, but there are
    times when I have it set appropriately for the lighting conditions and it
    still needs to be adjusted. Raw conversion is the best time to make a white
    balance correction; there's only so much you can do with a jpg right from
    the camera.

    Can't help you there.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Jan 19, 2005
    #8
  9. Jimmy Smith

    Mark B. Guest

    Yes, you really are a yo-yo. Do some research before you make statements
    which have little basis in fact.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Jan 19, 2005
    #9
  10. Jimmy Smith

    Tom Scales Guest


    I agree, how ridiculous.
     
    Tom Scales, Jan 19, 2005
    #10
  11. Jimmy Smith

    Owamanga Guest

    Ignore him Jimmy, he top posted, so obviously doesn't have a clue.

    Other signs: 'lossyless' is a made up word, and I can't even guess at
    what the last sentence was trying to say.
     
    Owamanga, Jan 19, 2005
    #11
  12. Wrong on two counts. There are many errors that cannot be corrected, and
    RAW allows for better pictures in the hands of those who know how to use it.
     
    John McWilliams, Jan 19, 2005
    #12
  13. Jimmy Smith

    Larry Guest

    Im VERY glad you didn't say MIND or BRAIN, as I dont think the OP has either.

    Im not a "big time" pro, but I've had several dozen photos published, and
    I've sold quite a few.

    I know that a large part of what was published, and almost ALL of what has
    been sold wouldn'r have been any good (or at least AS good) without RAW.
     
    Larry, Jan 19, 2005
    #13
  14. Jimmy Smith

    Ryan Robbins Guest

    Or tweak curves and white balance settings to enhance and otherwise
    experiment without losing data.
     
    Ryan Robbins, Jan 19, 2005
    #14
  15. Jimmy Smith

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    I hate to nitpick :) , but you're not in any kind of "file" when you do
    a RAW conversion with CS. You have RGB data in memory. "PSD" is just
    the default file type CS chooses if you go to save the image (which also
    is the best way to preserve any multiple layers).

    If you set the converter to give 8-bit output, you can just choose to
    save as JPEG. Of course, you're better off saving as 16-bit until all
    your editing is done (or all the editing that *can* be done in 16-bit is
    done).
    --
     
    JPS, Jan 20, 2005
    #15
  16. Jimmy Smith

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    No; RAW is a better capture, and one of the side effects is better
    exposure lattitude.

    I can just imagine you looking at a Canon DSLR that goes down to ISO 100
    and saying to yourself, this is nice, but too bad it doesn't have ISO
    50, too!

    Wake up, it does; at least by your own standard! ISO 100 with an EC of
    +1 in RAW mode gives you a better ISO 50 than you would get if the
    camera actually went to 50, in JPEG mode. One bit more depth for the
    subject, no JPEG artifacts, and more headroom in the blue and red
    channels that would be clipped if the camera did an ISO 50 JPEG!

    If you had any comprehension of the subjects you balk at, you would be
    able to understand this.


    --
     
    JPS, Jan 20, 2005
    #16
  17. Jimmy Smith

    JPS Guest

    In message <[email protected]>,
    Who are we to criticize Yoyo? He used to personally accompany Ansel
    Adams when he dropped his sheets of film off at Woolworths!
    --
     
    JPS, Jan 20, 2005
    #17
  18. Jimmy Smith

    Jimmy Smith Guest

    Have you................Ron?
     
    Jimmy Smith, Jan 20, 2005
    #18
  19. So, don't do it!
    Since I usually process in 16 bit, jpeg is effectively cut off until I
    save it in PSD. But I'd agree with your pick of nits, sorta.
     
    John McWilliams, Jan 20, 2005
    #19
  20. Jimmy Smith

    Bill Guest

    The CS flow from RAW -> Jpeg is to convert the RAW to tiff and then do
    'Save As' with format 'jpeg'. No need to make a psd file or even save
    the tiff if you don't want to ...

    I usually use Capture One and that lets you convert directly to tiff or
    jpeg (or both at once).

    Bill
     
    Bill, Jan 21, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.