disadvantages of RAW?

[aloyteo]

hi all, is it normal for pictures shot in RAW to have higher noise? below is a shot i took in RAW and then process it in PS CS2.

just to ask, how many of you people actually shoot in RAW format? is it really that good?

 

[kahheng]

There are more than a few things to consider, esp. ISO, exposure.

That said, the ability of the raw converter used plays a big part too. In my experience, Adobe's Camera Raw is not always the best converter to use. And neither is any ONE converter for ALL types of pictures.

 

[S11loop]

from my understanding , RAW suppose to give u better control as in noise as compare to the compress JPEG format . I am a RAW believer but then sometime i need to shoot in JPEG if i dont have the time to process my photographs

 

[uginz]

in RAW, noise comes from the way you shoot the photo.
the usualy culprits are ISO, long exposure.
noise also becomes very visible when you try to brighten up extensively a very underexposed photo. example, increasing exposure on raw converters by +2 or more.

to prevent noise, shoot at the lowest iso possible, and shortest exposure possible.

RAW just gives you more post processing control and more details

 

[ortega]

shoot well and you don't have to post process

 

[Zerstorer]

If you are not using the manufacturer's own RAW convertor, you will most certainly have to adjust the noise reduction settings, sharpening, curves, exposure to get an optimal result. Such settings vary between different RAW convertors and you will have to get familiar with the software before you can obtain a satisfactory result.

A camera jpeg basically has undergone all of the above transformations.

 

[NMSS_2]

not sure about other brands' raw format but ORF (oly raw) contains more details than jpeg. most default raw convertor should be better than photoshop ACR.

fully agreed with uginz's points.

 

[user111]

raw is big file size ;p

 

[aloyteo]

thanks all for your help. i took the shot using ISO 50. so do you all mean i should use the canon RAW converter if i want the best results?

 

[shinken]

raw, you at least need to covert, so at least one step of PP.

 

[+evenstar]

I shot a D&D few weeks back, and compared my shots to my other photographer who was shooting in JPEG. His shots were a lot less noisy than my shots, which were in RAW

 

[aloyteo]

i finally found an excellent RAW software - Phase One Capture One Pro. now my images are much cleaner.

 

[kahheng]

i finally found an excellent RAW software - Phase One Capture One Pro. now my images are much cleaner.

How much did you pay for it?

 

[aloyteo]

erm actually im using the 30 day free trial.

 

[speedblade]

get the camera profile to use with C0 software and you're half way to nirvana.

the "setback" is extra time infront of PC, larger HDD needed, colour cal-ed monitor (you don't want green to become orange on someone's monitor .....) and more CF to bring.

Other than that, it's been "the" way for me anyway.

Heard RSE not bad too. Free somemore.


Happy Shooting.

 

[Isaiahfortythirtyone]

what is RSE? yeah i find that RAW has more noise too. i use 350D with canon digital photo professional

 

[drumma]

perhaps it's due to the in camera noise reduction eh? why not off the noise reduction and take a photo, in jpeg and raw version?

 

[shinken]

perhaps it's due to the in camera noise reduction eh? why not off the noise reduction and take a photo, in jpeg and raw version?

There has been a kind of obsession with "clean images" with noise being evil with the coming of the digital age. Take a closer look at the noise pattern differences between raw and jpeg. You will probably find more detail in the noise of raw as compared to jpeg. If you don't like it, just run a noise reduction plugin and smother the details to look like the jpeg (same principle as "shoot in colour, convert into black and white later). For Canon, I'm not sure if the noise reduction can be turned off.

RSE should be Raw Shooter Essentials I think.

 

[Steplim]

I normally select the highest RAW quality+fine. I prefer taking pics in RAW (3-4 MB) with JPEG (small size, 100kB).
Yes, I agree that RAW format need add. step to convert but anyway, all pics need to view right and appreciate after the hard work. What I have noticed is that the pics in RAW format will look slightly darker before converted and when compare with the converted one though. I normally keep the RAW and Converted-RAW for comparison. Of course if time permit though.

 

[exhibitj]

perhaps it's due to the in camera noise reduction eh? why not off the noise reduction and take a photo, in jpeg and raw version?

Erm, doesn't switching the in-camera Noise Reduction off counter-intuitive to having a less Noisy photo in RAW??:dunno: