Best and most effective way is to master your own cameras controls fully, be it tuning white balance, exposure etc, end of the day whether you are saving in Jpeg or Raw, less time and effort will be needed to correct anything.
.RAW vs .JPG
- Thread starter johnmaeda
- Start date
- Status
Dun worry there's nothing wrong with shooting jpeg
I just find raw easier to post process
I shoot insect macros... they dun give many second chances... if you miss it, they are gone...
That may be true, but they can be awfully slow. My usual practice is to grab all the files over to my processing folder, convert the ocr to dng, then look at the thumbnails. SQ jpg doesn't really take much space, but it sure does add a lot of convenience...like drag over to msn. haha
Dun worry... to each their own...
we're just trying to point out some of their merits.
If I work for a print firm and I need action shots fast, I'd stick with jpeg too... But as it is, I'd still prefer more time and having the luxury of tweaking each file slowly on the PC.
Hi Antimony60 you can try shooting a pic in raw
you'll see that its actually quite easy to tune the white balance
i used to shoot Jpeg too
But since trying out Raw,i've never looked back
Do you preview the raw images on the camera's LCD screen and do the fine tune on the camera or ....? Pardon my ignorance. Thanks !!
Can share shrae your expertise in correcting exposures/white balance of the raw images? Sounds very interesting !!! Thanks Bro.
If u use adobe bridge or lightroom, u can use the the controls to easy manipulate the exposures and WB. =)
You tune it back on the PC. There's a whole range of white balance prefix to choose from if the colour looks off from your AWB setting. Also, there is a custom white balance where you can click on a white or 18% grey area to set the white balance during the raw conversion stage.
Hi all,
since the topic is about RAW vs JPEG, I just have a question.
Just of of curiosity, I shot in RAW format recently at night.
I use my trusty Adobe Photo 6.0 to open the file. Since the file was in RAW format, it was rather large, so I reduced the size to 500 px ( width ). I didn't touch any setting except to add a border ( and my name ;p ) to the photo.
In RAW it was pretty sharp. The dark skies was black.
However when I converted and saved the picture in Jpeg format, I realized that the dark skies seems to lose its "darkness" even though I saved the JPEG is the MAX resolution. I could see some pixels in the dark skies. The rest of the colourful parts seems quite ok.
I attached the picture to exemplify what I meant. Can anyone share their experience?
Is there any "correct" way to convert and save file from RAW to JPEG?
since the topic is about RAW vs JPEG, I just have a question.
Just of of curiosity, I shot in RAW format recently at night.
I use my trusty Adobe Photo 6.0 to open the file. Since the file was in RAW format, it was rather large, so I reduced the size to 500 px ( width ). I didn't touch any setting except to add a border ( and my name ;p ) to the photo.
In RAW it was pretty sharp. The dark skies was black.
However when I converted and saved the picture in Jpeg format, I realized that the dark skies seems to lose its "darkness" even though I saved the JPEG is the MAX resolution. I could see some pixels in the dark skies. The rest of the colourful parts seems quite ok.
I attached the picture to exemplify what I meant. Can anyone share their experience?
Is there any "correct" way to convert and save file from RAW to JPEG?
usually i dun save the profile as sRGB when i convert to jpg. i did not check the box when i use adobe bridge to convert the photos via PS.
no... the advantage that RAW has, in that it is a record of the readout off the sensor, is that colour conversion algorithms, demosaicing algorithms and white point has not been applied applied to the data yet... this would allow the user to adjust the colours of the image less destructively, and as well allow improvements in algorithm design/conversion programs to allow improvements in image resolution and colour production...
these are advantages that RAW has even over tif which is also a lossless 16bit capable format...
No prophoto, i use bridge to convert from RAW to jpeg, leaving the sRGB profile unchecked, i din select other options. However, the color space of my cam is sRGB.
When I shoot studio or for personal entertainment, I shoot in RAW.
When I'm shooting for assignment/events/work/news, I shoot JPG.
when the turnaround time is very short (imagine shooting at 5pm, photos required by 7pm), a working photog simply won't have the time to spend adjusting the individual settings one by one.
When shooting for work, it's about spending less time for the best image, so shooting raw is out for most. If a photog still need raw to save exposures, he's not quite ready to shoot commercially, is he?
Details wise.. raw only offer minimally more details, usually totally not noticable unless you print A4 size or A3 size.
Colour vibrance, shouldn't be compared. It's only a matter of skill if you can't change it in jpgs.
Personally I love the ability to do and finetune 30% of my editing in RAW, but that takes ALOT more time, but practically wise I'll still shoot JPG if and when I have to.
- Status
