RAW files

[gman23xx]

What software do i use to view RAW. files and edit them, are there any free editing softwares or do i have to buy one? Besides, apart from RAW. files, are photos taken in JPG, nice to view?


gman

[zzyzx]

i'm using the DPP sw which bundles with my cam. works ok so far...

[Octarine]

Originally Posted by gman23xx What software do i use to view RAW. files and edit them, are there any free editing softwares or do i have to buy one? Besides, apart from RAW. files, are photos taken in JPG, nice to view? gman

RAW files are not for viewing but for editing and post-processing. RAW is (as the name suggests) the raw information from the sensor, unprocessed, unedited, just raw data. Usually your camera has some software bundled that can handle RAW files. RAW is not always the same, every camera manufacturer has it's own tweaks and 'adjustments'.
JPEG (or also JPG) are compressed image files. Initially invented with other formats (png, gif) to have small image files for the upcoming WWW when bandwidth was costly and dial-in modems at phone lines were used. JPG compression is not lossless (in contrast to gif and png) which always causes a quality loss depending on the compression settings. If your camera writes jpg to the memory card then some presets are applied which you can adjust. Canon gives it as file size "L", "M" .. the smaller the file the more compression is used and the more quality loss the picture will suffer. Check your manual for further details.
But also presets about saturation, sharpending, contrast etc. are applied. If you want to do post-processing on your own (and having full control over all these steps of white balance, saturation, contrast, sharpening etc.) then you need to read more about this topic (e.g. in Wikipedia). Most modern image editors and image processing tools (PhotoShop, Lightroom, PaintSHop, Gimp etc.) can handle the commonly used RAW formats from current camera manufacturers. If the bundled program does not provide the features you need then you need to spend some money. Exception: Gimp is Open Source and free. For raw file editing using GIMP you need UFRaw as raw converter.

[gman23xx]

Originally Posted by Octarine RAW files are not for viewing but for editing and post-processing. RAW is (as the name suggests) the raw information from the sensor, unprocessed, unedited, just raw data. Usually your camera has some software bundled that can handle RAW files. RAW is not always the same, every camera manufacturer has it's own tweaks and 'adjustments'. JPEG (or also JPG) are compressed image files. Initially invented with other formats (png, gif) to have small image files for the upcoming WWW when bandwidth was costly and dial-in modems at phone lines were used. JPG compression is not lossless (in contrast to gif and png) which always causes a quality loss depending on the compression settings. If your camera writes jpg to the memory card then some presets are applied which you can adjust. Canon gives it as file size "L", "M" .. the smaller the file the more compression is used and the more quality loss the picture will suffer. Check your manual for further details. But also presets about saturation, sharpending, contrast etc. are applied. If you want to do post-processing on your own (and having full control over all these steps of white balance, saturation, contrast, sharpening etc.) then you need to read more about this topic (e.g. in Wikipedia). Most modern image editors and image processing tools (PhotoShop, Lightroom, PaintSHop, Gimp etc.) can handle the commonly used RAW formats from current camera manufacturers. If the bundled program does not provide the features you need then you need to spend some money. Exception: Gimp is Open Source and free. For raw file editing using GIMP you need UFRaw as raw converter.

Wow thanks alot.


gman

[gman23xx]

Originally Posted by Octarine RAW files are not for viewing but for editing and post-processing. RAW is (as the name suggests) the raw information from the sensor, unprocessed, unedited, just raw data. Usually your camera has some software bundled that can handle RAW files. RAW is not always the same, every camera manufacturer has it's own tweaks and 'adjustments'. JPEG (or also JPG) are compressed image files. Initially invented with other formats (png, gif) to have small image files for the upcoming WWW when bandwidth was costly and dial-in modems at phone lines were used. JPG compression is not lossless (in contrast to gif and png) which always causes a quality loss depending on the compression settings. If your camera writes jpg to the memory card then some presets are applied which you can adjust. Canon gives it as file size "L", "M" .. the smaller the file the more compression is used and the more quality loss the picture will suffer. Check your manual for further details. But also presets about saturation, sharpending, contrast etc. are applied. If you want to do post-processing on your own (and having full control over all these steps of white balance, saturation, contrast, sharpening etc.) then you need to read more about this topic (e.g. in Wikipedia). Most modern image editors and image processing tools (PhotoShop, Lightroom, PaintSHop, Gimp etc.) can handle the commonly used RAW formats from current camera manufacturers. If the bundled program does not provide the features you need then you need to spend some money. Exception: Gimp is Open Source and free. For raw file editing using GIMP you need UFRaw as raw converter.

Wow thanks alot.


gman

[calebk]

Originally Posted by gman23xx What software do i use to view RAW. files and edit them, are there any free editing softwares or do i have to buy one? Besides, apart from RAW. files, are photos taken in JPG, nice to view? gman

Um every photo uploaded on the web is pretty much a JPG, so do you think they are nice to view?

[engrmariano]

MACBOOK can view RAW right away.

[Octarine]

Originally Posted by engrmariano MACBOOK can view RAW right away.

Irfanview for Windows can do the same. But in general: Does it make sense to look at raw data without any processing? All viewers might start interpreting something from the data but that's not the purpose. It's like looking at negatives (ok... even then there was already processing).

[gman23xx]

Originally Posted by calebk Um every photo uploaded on the web is pretty much a JPG, so do you think they are nice to view?

Yeah, they are very nice indeed.


gman

[gman23xx]

Originally Posted by Octarine Irfanview for Windows can do the same. But in general: Does it make sense to look at raw data without any processing? All viewers might start interpreting something from the data but that's not the purpose. It's like looking at negatives (ok... even then there was already processing).

Darn windows....lol....mac would cost a fortune.....


gman

[Schmike]

use the Digital Photo Professional that comes in the CD with ur 450D. i just start to use that last night since i was recommended to take the pictures in RAW by someone.

u can convert the image to jpg with DPP.

[hammie]

Originally Posted by Schmike use the Digital Photo Professional that comes in the CD with ur 450D. i just start to use that last night since i was recommended to take the pictures in RAW by someone. u can convert the image to jpg with DPP.

Raw is good but to some extend it is not practical. For more important and model shoot I use raw, for events I go jpegs

[calebk]

Originally Posted by hammie Raw is good but to some extend it is not practical. For more important and model shoot I use raw, for events I go jpegs

It also depends largely on how tricky lighting is and whether I need to do a quick turnaround.

[Schmike]

Originally Posted by hammie Raw is good but to some extend it is not practical. For more important and model shoot I use raw, for events I go jpegs

agree RAW is when u need better quality images.

Originally Posted by calebk It also depends largely on how tricky lighting is and whether I need to do a quick turnaround.

my pics was due to insufficent lighting which caused the pics to lose the sharpness cos of slow shutter speed. by taking with RAW i can get better images to process with.

[gman23xx]

Originally Posted by Schmike agree RAW is when u need better quality images. my pics was due to insufficent lighting which caused the pics to lose the sharpness cos of slow shutter speed. by taking with RAW i can get better images to process with.

True indeed.


gman

[Schmike]

this was the problem i had with jpg:





can c that the images r not sharp. n the fishes looks blured.

taken with RAW:





i can even take this shot which i would say is almost impossible in jpg with my current standard n equpiments:



for lighting i only have 4 fluorescent tubes in the tank. no external flash used. n im only using kit lens for the above shots. so RAW really improve the quality of my images.

[Schmike]

Originally Posted by gman23xx True indeed. gman

anyway im just a noob. what i say may not be true. this is just based on my own experience with RAW as i can really c a very big difference in the images i got.

[gman23xx]

Originally Posted by Schmike anyway im just a noob. what i say may not be true. this is just based on my own experience with RAW as i can really c a very big difference in the images i got.

Nah...you're not a noob....everyone is learning. Well i can see the difference though, but when you upload the picture it has to be in JPG format right. I always knew RAW was the best. Even for my sony point and shoot, sometimes i get the pictures blur, due to the JPG compression. Thanks to zeiss lens, it's minimal. But with RAW you have the power to make pictures nicer and sharper.


gman

[Schmike]

Originally Posted by gman23xx Nah...you're not a noob....everyone is learning. Well i can see the difference though, but when you upload the picture it has to be in JPG format right. I always knew RAW was the best. Even for my sony point and shoot, sometimes i get the pictures blur, due to the JPG compression. Thanks to zeiss lens, it's minimal. But with RAW you have the power to make pictures nicer and sharper. gman

yes. i convert it to jpg in DPP. n the converted jpg file was still very big. my original RAW file was ard 17MB n the jpg was ard 13MB.

[gman23xx]

Yupp, because it retained most of the RAW settings. Whats DPP?


gman