Raw vs jpeg

[japlook]

hi guys..

i know taking raw allow one to further process the image in photoshop.
but after i took pictures using jpeg format, i am able to use photoshop. like contrast, saturation crop and resize. then wat's e use of RAW format? since i able to use jpeg.

am jus a newbie starting out. hope u guys can help me.

cheers

 

[hyori]

from what i know.. everytym u pp a jpeg file.. the IQ become lower and lower.... correct me if i m wrong

 

[daredevil123]

If you do not know the difference between the two, this means you should continue shooting in JPEG and save the hassle.

 

[catchlights]

hi guys..

i know taking raw allow one to further process the image in photoshop.
but after i took pictures using jpeg format, i am able to use photoshop. like contrast, saturation crop and resize. then wat's e use of RAW format? since i able to use jpeg.

am jus a newbie starting out. hope u guys can help me.

cheers

if you can get what you want in jpg, there is nothing wrong with shooting with jpg.

 

[2ichigo2]

Changing of white balance is better in RAW.

 

[catchlights]

from what i know.. everytym u pp a jpeg file.. the IQ become lower and lower.... correct me if i m wrong

that is another issue, you can just shoot jpgand edit it, but if you plan to edit and re-edit and re-edit, best save it in tiff or PSD, output to jpg only you are done with the editing

 

[robertgl]

RAW format can be considered your digital negative. This file has not been processed in any way. This allows you to make more changes that on a JPEG file. For example you can change settings such as exposure, white balance, sharpness, etc.

 

[japlook]

so meaning to say, image quality will decrease after PP is done on jpeg. whereas, RAW format will remain the IQ even after many PP done on the image.?

so is this the main difference bwt the 2?

btw, i realize that when i resize the jpeg image(making it smaller), it became blur when i zoom in. is this normal? or this will be corrected if i used RAW format?

 

[PrimePhotog]

so meaning to say, image quality will decrease after PP is done on jpeg. whereas, RAW format will remain the IQ even after many PP done on the image.?

so is this the main difference bwt the 2?

btw, i realize that when i resize the jpeg image(making it smaller), it became blur when i zoom in. is this normal? or this will be corrected if i used RAW format?
Reply With Quote

Simply put, yeah you are right. This is because every time you process a jpeg whether in camera on in PP, your image will be compressed, resulting in lower IQ.

And when you say that you" resize the jpeg image(making it smaller), it became blur when i zoom in", it simply means that your software is compressing the jpeg file again. When you compress to a smaller image file, your IQ degrades even more than when you save as large jpeg.

Hope you understand.

 

[zac08]

hi guys..

i know taking raw allow one to further process the image in photoshop.
but after i took pictures using jpeg format, i am able to use photoshop. like contrast, saturation crop and resize. then wat's e use of RAW format? since i able to use jpeg.

am jus a newbie starting out. hope u guys can help me.

cheers

RAW is a format which is lossless... you can keep editing it and the original is not affected. Also it is the format which the data is stored when the picture is taken, you choose how you want to convert it in post-processing stage.

Jpeg is limited by the camera's conversion method and it is a lossy format. Lots of details are lost and will be continuously lost as you keep editing it and saving over it.

 

[LBL2009]

hi guys..

then wat's e use of RAW format? since i able to use jpeg.

am jus a newbie starting out. hope u guys can help me.

cheers

I am a newbie too.

As a newbie, shooting in raw allow me to know the mistakes I made in camera settings. I can find out what should be the better white balance, exposures, and other camera settings during pp. Some important settings data are lost in Jpeg.

 

[poisonbox]

RAW is a format which is lossless... you can keep editing it and the original is not affected. Also it is the format which the data is stored when the picture is taken, you choose how you want to convert it in post-processing stage.

Jpeg is limited by the camera's conversion method and it is a lossy format. Lots of details are lost and will be continuously lost as you keep editing it and saving over it.

so.. does it make any difference if i shoot in raw and after which i use viewNX(nikon user) to convert to jpg without any editing

or

will the result be the same as shooting in jpg format straight?


:dunno:

 

[Squid]

....taking raw allow one to further process the image in photoshop. but after i took pictures using jpeg format, i am able to use photoshop. like contrast, saturation crop and resize. then wat's e use of RAW format? since i able to use jpeg.

Below are some links about RAW edge over JPEG
http://www.isl.co.jp/SILKYPIX/english/raw/merit/index.html
http://photo.net/learn/raw/
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml

 

[MontoyaSG]

Probably one of the best compromise is to shoot RAW+JPG.

In some instances the cam's image processor would have done a better job to recover highlights in high contrast scenes which may take quite a bit of work if you're working from the RAW file.

Personally I'm a jpg shooter with all the dynamic range expanders enabled if I'm travelling. Saves the trouble of having to convert a whole ton of RAW files upon return.

 

[zac08]

so.. does it make any difference if i shoot in raw and after which i use viewNX(nikon user) to convert to jpg without any editing

or

will the result be the same as shooting in jpg format straight?


:dunno:

There will be a difference. Your RAW conversion can already do a basic B&W conversion. But most would want to use other filters or methods, which may give u a higher boost and more control over which area you'd like to pull and push.

 

[pufferfizh]

Basically raw format contain 16-bit files whereas jpeg is in compressed format and most times will be in 8-bit after conversion. If u put the same photo in two different formats next to each other, you will notice that the 16 bit files colour are a lot richer than the 8 bit files. Of course raw format files also has the advantage of containg all the details at the point which the photo was taken by the camera.

 

[zac08]

Basically raw format contain 16-bit files whereas jpeg is in compressed format and most times will be in 8-bit after conversion. If u put the same photo in two different formats next to each other, you will notice that the 16 bit files colour are a lot richer than the 8 bit files. Of course raw format files also has the advantage of containg all the details at the point which the photo was taken by the camera.

This depends on the camera. Not all cameras are 16 bit.

 

[edson1884]

i used raw for shooting but after editing with NX2 (nikon user), i wasnt able to upload to Facebook etc...coz its NEF format rather than jpeg...any advice...thanks...

 

[Squid]

i used raw for shooting but after editing with NX2 (nikon user), i wasnt able to upload to Facebook etc...coz its NEF format rather than jpeg...any advice...thanks...

From Nikon CaptureNX2 menu, File > Save As > Select JPEG from File Type

Choose desired quality setting and JPEG file is created by CaptureNX2

 

[tsubasa10]

Probably one of the best compromise is to shoot RAW+JPG.

In some instances the cam's image processor would have done a better job to recover highlights in high contrast scenes which may take quite a bit of work if you're working from the RAW file.

Personally I'm a jpg shooter with all the dynamic range expanders enabled if I'm travelling. Saves the trouble of having to convert a whole ton of RAW files upon return.

hi

what is meant by dynamic range expander enabled? is it possible with all dslrs?

thanks