Digital owners: What file type do you shoot with?

[Drudkh]

I just did a simple test with my A1. It seems that RAW mode gives me the best quality in terms of details and noise, but the picture turned out darker than jpeg or tiff. Is it that whatever I set for colour/contrast/EV doesn't have effect? I often read that RAW files need to process to get the result I want, so is that the case?

Thanks.
Don.

[GENO]

yah .. i use to shoot in JPEG........ only when the lighting is poor than i shoot RAW....

[UY79]

Originally Posted by Drudkh I just did a simple test with my A1. It seems that RAW mode gives me the best quality in terms of details and noise, but the picture turned out darker than jpeg or tiff. Is it that whatever I set for colour/contrast/EV doesn't have effect? I often read that RAW files need to process to get the result I want, so is that the case? Thanks. Don.

Digital cameras do not usually touch colours and sharpening in RAW. Changes to exposure parameters will definitely affect the shot.

If I have a digital camera, I'll shoot RAW. Go back home and process individual frames to the colour tones I want, keeping the best quality that I can get from RAW.

Just like there's different film for different photographic needs, there isn't a "shoot it all" colour setting in digital cameras. And I do not want to be caught adjusting colour settings everytime I change from shooting people to shooting landscape to shooting animals or when weather conditions changes and start missing shots.

This will be the workflow that I will take should I go digital. There are other workflows around, it's just which you are more comfortable with.

Cheers!

[alpie]

I shoot in Extra-fine JPEG. I don't want to bother with shooting in RAW, converting every picture, adjusting colors for every shot, takes too much space, time and effort. I am busy enough, I don't want to spend too much time on family pictures. Efine JPEG gives me more than what I need.

After shooting in Efine JPEG, if necessary I do some processing. Then I usually compress them even more to save space on my Harddisk (and backups of course).

None of my friends (including DSLR owners) shoot in RAW. WE THINK it is too much hassle for very little advantage.

[UY79]

Originally Posted by alpie I shoot in Extra-fine JPEG. I don't want to bother with shooting in RAW, converting every picture, adjusting colors for every shot, takes too much space, time and effort. I am busy enough, I don't want to spend too much time on family pictures. Efine JPEG gives me more than what I need. After shooting in Efine JPEG, if necessary I do some processing. Then I usually compress them even more to save space on my Harddisk (and backups of course). None of my friends (including DSLR owners) shoot in RAW. WE THINK it is too much hassle for very little advantage.

All of my friends who uses DSLR, shoots RAW. They find it convenient working with RAW using RAW conversion tools either supplied by the camera's manufacturer or third party software. These software allows for batch processing, so there's no need to go through individual frames if similar colour tones are to be applied.

They do prints, mostly 4R or 8R for better photos, and it's important for them to have the best quality and colours in the prints.

If you have been reading articles on the Internet, more authors favour RAW for their professional work.

There's no running away from post processing in photography, even film. It's just how you go about doing it.

Cheers!

[Kho King]

I use S2Pro. I find Photoshop CS raw converter can't give very nice pic. Not sure why...the colours and noise seems worse than the same pic using Jpeg fine.

Any idea why?

[UY79]

Originally Posted by Kho King I use S2Pro. I find Photoshop CS raw converter can't give very nice pic. Not sure why...the colours and noise seems worse than the same pic using Jpeg fine. Any idea why?

This is the wrong forum to post this question.

S2 Pro uses CCD-RAW. It is more "raw" than any of the RAW format out there. Basically, Minolta's RAW does not apply sharpening, Canon's RAW has just about every processing done, and S2 Pro has nothing done to it's RAW.

It's straight out of the CCD without sharpening, noise reduction or other any other processing.

Cheers!

[Drudkh]

Originally Posted by UY79 This is the wrong forum to post this question. S2 Pro uses CCD-RAW. It is more "raw" than any of the RAW format out there. Basically, Minolta's RAW does not apply sharpening, Canon's RAW has just about every processing done, and S2 Pro has nothing done to it's RAW. It's straight out of the CCD without sharpening, noise reduction or other any other processing. Cheers!

you seems to impress me very much with your knowledge on digital cam stuffs.

[alpie]

If S2PRO is more RAW than the others, according to the experts you should get even better quality. But that is not the case apparently according to your experiences. So?

The answer might be : You have to put more effort to make your RAW pictures look better than the ordinary JPEGs.

Or listen to the common sense: Majority (majority, big majority..) digicam owners shot in JPEG. Raw mode may not be not so practical for daily amateur shooting. Raw mode is for those who may want to spend time to improve their pictures by a couple of percentage, if the picture is enlarged and inspected under microscope.

I didn't spend too much time on Raw mode, but in my personal opinion, I wouldn't use it unless the I know that the picture I am shooting is a very special one.

Professional photographers have every reason to shoot in RAW. But I am a computer engineer

[UY79]

Originally Posted by alpie If S2PRO is more RAW than the others, according to the experts you should get even better quality. But that is not the case apparently according to your experiences. So? The answer might be : You have to put more effort to make your RAW pictures look better than the ordinary JPEGs. Or listen to the common sense: Majority (majority, big majority..) digicam owners shot in JPEG. Raw mode may not be not so practical for daily amateur shooting. Raw mode is for those who may want to spend time to improve their pictures by a couple of percentage, if the picture is enlarged and inspected under microscope. I didn't spend too much time on Raw mode, but in my personal opinion, I wouldn't use it unless the I know that the picture I am shooting is a very special one. Professional photographers have every reason to shoot in RAW. But I am a computer engineer

As a computer engineer, you should understand digital imaging better than the majority of other digicam users.

Let me explain some points you have put up.

Some imaging processes induce loss or degrades image quality, such as compression, sharpening, colour mapping, etc. Taking them out in RAW helps to improve image quality. This is where most experts agree on.

However, noise reduction is a process that enhance image quality. Taking it out will degrade the RAW output. If S2 Pro RAW has noise reduction, it would have the best RAW output from a DSLR during its time.

To post-process noise reduction is a killer. That's why there's preference for S2 Pro users and even future S3 Pro users, S3 Pro uses CCD-RAW too, to shoot in JPEG. I also understand there's no good RAW converters for S2 Pro users.

I'm not going to discuss further on RAW or JPEG, although I disagree with your assumptions. I'll leave it as it is, since it's always personal preference and knowledge of the subject matter that dictates usage.

Cheers!

[alpie]

Originally Posted by UY79 As a computer engineer, you should understand digital imaging better than the majority of other digicam users. Let me explain some points you have put up. Some imaging processes induce loss or degrades image quality, such as compression, sharpening, colour mapping, etc. Taking them out in RAW helps to improve image quality. This is where most experts agree on. However, noise reduction is a process that enhance image quality. Taking it out will degrade the RAW output. If S2 Pro RAW has noise reduction, it would have the best RAW output from a DSLR during its time. To post-process noise reduction is a killer. That's why there's preference for S2 Pro users and even future S3 Pro users, S3 Pro uses CCD-RAW too, to shoot in JPEG. I also understand there's no good RAW converters for S2 Pro users. I'll leave it as it is, since it's always personal preference and knowledge of the subject matter that dictates usage. Cheers!

I 100% agree with your comments above. I also use external noise reduction software, according to my observations it works best in uncompressed/high-detail images. I also appreciate the advantage of white balance adjustment on RAW.

At the end, as you said ,as we said, it is personal preference.

Cheers!