Pixalo Photography Community

Go Back   Pixalo Photography Community > Photography Forums > General photography questions and answers

General photography questions and answers: Discuss RAW.....?...Shooting with my little D40x i've never been sure whether RAW or the highest quality Jpeg is my best option. ...
Welcome to the Pixalo Photography Community. As a Guest you are free to browse the site, but see what extras you get as a Member here.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-04-2008, 22:55   #1 (permalink)
Getting Comfy
 
EKIMIKE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Warminster, Wiltshire, England
Posts: 102
EKIMIKE is on a distinguished roadEKIMIKE is on a distinguished road

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
RAW.....?

Shooting with my little D40x i've never been sure whether RAW or the highest quality Jpeg is my best option. Now form reading around, i've learned that RAW gives better results in post processing as it loses less quality with each alteration.

My question lies in the conversion from RAW to something i can use to edit. At the moment i'm stuck with Picture Project as i've never really understood this business enough to look at a specialised RAW conversion program. Is this keeping in line with the idea that my image will lose less quality or is tha fact im converting it into a Jpeg mean this whole process is worthless?

If anyone can make sense of it i'd be greatful

MiKE
EKIMIKE is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2008, 23:32   #2 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
JMitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 4,945
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

I think I would be right in saying that most people who shoot RAW do most of their exposure and contrast etc. adjustments before converting, then do the 'photoshopping' (whatever the program may be) after having saved it. I have reason to believe most people save as .TIFF files, as these are (pretty much) lossless, and aren't really affected by constant editing and saving.
This does mean much larger file sizes (some 16bit converted TIFFs from my D300 are 70mb), but residual quality.

HTH

Jack
JMitchell is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2008, 23:55   #3 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
dabhand16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dunstable Bedfordshire UK
Posts: 30,238
dabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of light
dabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Mike - you can get free RAW converters. Also Sandisk often include a code for Capture One LE with some of their memory cards.

You mention loss of quality. Well, the good news is that when you convert the RAW file you do not modify the priginal, so that is always available to go back to if you want. Once you run an image through the converter, you can save it as a jpeg or a tiff file.

Tiffs are, as Jack said, a lossless file, so you can open it edit it and save it as often as you like with no quality losses. With jpegs you loose information every time you save, so eventually your image will be degraded.

Of course, it makes sense to 'save as' too as the original RAW conversion can be useful if you want to check back to see the differences the editing has made.
__________________
Graham
dabhand16 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 00:24   #4 (permalink)
Growing roots
 
Charlotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Romsey, Hampshire
Posts: 8,392
Charlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of light
Charlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Just to add to what's already been said ...

You would only need to convert to jpeg if you want to display on the web. Otherwise you can print straight from RAW (using Lightroom, not sure about other prog's) or TIFF.

If you're into books, a good introduction to the RAW workflow is "Understanding RAW Photography" by Andy Rouse.
Charlotte is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 07:55   #5 (permalink)
Feet under the table
 
j sotelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Diego, Ca. Where the Surf meets the Turf
Posts: 3,235
j sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of light
j sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

RAW

Raw files are just the raw sensor data. It isn't a picture until it is processed further
you need a "special" software to view it.

uncompressed (a 10 megapixel camera like you have will produce a 10 MB Raw file).
not suitable for printing directly from the camera
read only (all changes are saved in an XMP “sidecar” file or to a JPEG or other image format).

Raw isn't even a format, even though the different files have the same suffix like .CRW or .NEF.

A BIG problem with Raw Files it's the potential ability of future software to read it.
It will be possible that 10 years from now we will have a hard time openeing a RAW file due to the fact
that Raw is proprietary to camera make and model and even camera firmware version.
Without solid manufacturer support you won't be able to use your raw files again.
Thats why people who shoot Raw will convert to .Tif or to .DNG wich I think is wiser IMO .DNG will be the future universal format.

IMO a Raw file is only good to shoot and load and covert to .tif or .dng that way you can use all that data to process.
and then take the raw file straight to the trash bin.

I found that every Raw "Viewer" like Photoshop, capture one, Lightroom, Bibble Pro, ETC. processes the image a little bit differently in terms of
sharpness, curves and colors, so you never really have a definitive look until after you've opened and saved the file as a standard JPG, PSD or TIFF.


JPG or JPeG

JPG's are normal digital camera images. Cameras create JPG images from raw image sensor data based on your settings like Sharpness and White Balance.
The camera makes the JPG and then the raw data is gone as soon as the JPG is recorded.
JPGs are universal.
Instant printing requires JPEG
In your D40x Im not completely sure but I think you get 3 fps continuous shooting, unlimited in JPEG
IMO JPG processing in the camera can be better than what you may be able to do later in software from raw.

you can make perfect prints right of JPGs
So in the end I think we really shoot Raw because we fiddle too much with our images and we want to save an original, we might accept it we might not,
but if you read closely thats the plain truth.
C'mon if a photographer shoots a full series of studio shots wrong by half a stop and not know it on a digital camera.
then something is wrong.
so it cant be that we shoot Raw because we want to fix highlights and shadows or curves.






(im not done but got tired LOL, Good night)
__________________
"Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. And a large group of professionals built the Titanic"
j sotelo is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 10:21   #6 (permalink)
Growing roots
 
Charlotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Romsey, Hampshire
Posts: 8,392
Charlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of light
Charlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Hmmmm I'm guessing Sotelo is not a fan of RAW This will be why he's listed all the pro's for JPEG and con's for RAW but not vice versa. There are pro's and con's for both, but I'm busy at the mo' to list them, and will return later to do so, unless someone else does first.

Re: RAW being a difficult ("non-") format to read, i.e. not universal, we have really progressed beyond that now, and most image editors (later versions) can indeed read and edit the most popular RAW formats, and these are updated as new cameras come out. It is tedious for the software developers, but good for us, the end user. Point being it is no longer the big stumbling block it used to be. Surely the 1000's of photographers who shoot RAW can't all be wrong!

BBL
__________________
What you do todayis important because you exchanged a day of your life for it

You only ever get one chance to make a good first impression

Work Smarter, Not Harder
Charlotte is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 11:51   #7 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
JMitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 4,945
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Quote:
Originally Posted by j sotelo View Post
IMO JPG processing in the camera can be better than what you may be able to do later in software from raw.

you can make perfect prints right of JPGs
I understood and agreed up to here...
I do not think at all that the in camera JPG processing can be better. There is a clear difference in end sharpness for a start, and dynamic range is restricted. By all means, nowadays in camera JPG processing is very good, but it still doesn't live up to RAW, otherwise manufacturers wouldn't include it

As per your second comment, I do not think this is true either. Almost all of the time, unless you are in a studio with perfect lighting, and very high quality optics, you will have to edit your images to get the best of out them. Amateurs and pros alike do it, and as I said before, there must be a reason behind it, otherwise noone would do it. Even in the days of film, did you not make adjustments for conrast, and use dodging and burning to enhance the image?
JMitchell is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 12:25   #8 (permalink)
Getting Comfy
 
EKIMIKE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Warminster, Wiltshire, England
Posts: 102
EKIMIKE is on a distinguished roadEKIMIKE is on a distinguished road

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

So if you want to process an image in RAW do you convert it then play or alter things still RAW?
EKIMIKE is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 12:35   #9 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
JMitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 4,945
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

I alter exposure and contrast, colour balance, white balance etc BEFORE I convert to .tiff, then do things like cloning, dodging and burning with the .tiff file.
JMitchell is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 14:50   #10 (permalink)
Getting Comfy
 
EKIMIKE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Warminster, Wiltshire, England
Posts: 102
EKIMIKE is on a distinguished roadEKIMIKE is on a distinguished road

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

And what program do you use to alter things in RAW
EKIMIKE is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 14:57   #11 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
JMitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 4,945
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

I use a mixture of Adobe Camera RAW (comes with Photoshop), Nikon Capture NX, and Capture One 4, depending on what I want to do.

Camera RAW is what I'm most familiar with, and has the most options.

Capture NX (if you're using Nikon, which you are) keeps the camera's original data so the image you see in the camera will be exactly what comes out on the screen, and the colours will be more faithful to the camera's settings.

Capture One 4 is for batch processing really, and for getting extra image detail out (somehow it manages this), but sometimes you get extra noise in the final image. It's not really worth it for editing single files, but if you've just done a studio shoot and you want to apply a 'look' to all the pictures (plus you had control of the lighting so there shouldn't be any 'exceptions' that require different processing), then CO4 is a good option.

HTH
JMitchell is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 15:22   #12 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
Markulous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Peak District
Posts: 19,640
Markulous is a jewel in the rough
Markulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the rough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

One of the reasons I upgraded to dSLR? In-camera processing to JPG that was patently not very good (poor resolution in fine detail mainly)!

Since I got a dSLR? Not once have I directly created a JPG! Not even for commissioned work (often the apparent argument in favour of JPGs) tho' I'll acknowldege that I don't do time critical shooting

Arguments for producing JPGs at all (over TIFFs)? None now that storage costs have come way down, BB has taken over from dialup and even monitors are better for viewing websites!
Markulous is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 21:46   #13 (permalink)
Growing roots
 
Charlotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Romsey, Hampshire
Posts: 8,392
Charlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of light
Charlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of lightCharlotte is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

I'm back

OK here are the main advantages + disadvantages that I can think of for both RAW + JPEG :


RAW
Advantages:
  • You have more creative control over the end result of your images.
  • You get to keep the original as-shot image file unaltered, so that you can produce a completely different version/effect if you want to in the future. You could alternatively save a TIFF file with layers, but (a) the file would be huge + (b) it's finicky to pick out the separate manipulations which you want to undo. It's much quicker just to re-export the RAW file + start your new creation from scratch.
  • Non-degrading editing - most image corrections (unless you overdo it) will not degrade your image file. TIFF's are much the same - very tolerant of manipulations.
Disadvantages:
  • File size, although RAW's are not as big as TIFF's. Examples of file size are:
    • 1MB - JPEG
    • 5MB - RAW (on a 6MP camera)
    • 17MB - TIFF (or 34MB if saved with layers).
  • Because of large files, you do need a reasonably fast PC with a decent amount of storage space. RAM is a consideration, especially if you have folders with large numbers of RAW files, i.e. your PC needs to be able to handle having a large number of RAW files open at the same time, when you view them in Windows Explorer and/or edit them per folder.
  • You need a good workflow. This is not a disadvantage in itself, since we all need some sort of workflow in any event. But if you shoot in RAW you will be adding to your workflow, big time, maybe even doubling it or more. Why? Because you will likely (a) edit in RAW, then (b) convert to TIFF and edit that some more, then (c) convert to JPEG for web display, and you might want to add a few finishing touches to that file as well, e.g. sharpening. This means:
    • Double or triple work involved, and
    • Double or triple the number of files you end up with for EACH image - raw + tiff + jpeg + possibly a 2nd tiff with layers.
JPEG
Advantages:
  • Small file size. This means more shots per SD/CF card + less storage space on PC. You can see how much space you could save ref. "File sizes" above. It can be significant when you've collected 10,000 odd photo's.
  • Quicker processing by the camera, i.e. writes to the card faster + doesn't clog the buffer, which means more shots per second (in continuous shooting mode). This is the main reason why a lot of pro's shoot in JPEG, if they need to wire shots to the office straight away (e.g. sports events). (Also, pro's are often not allowed to manipulate images, because this may deviate from the reportage style which is crucial to maintain, so relying on the camera to do the processing is the sensible thing to do.)
  • You can leave it to the camera to do the processing, if you simply don't want to do this yourself.
Disadvantages:
  • You are relying on the camera to process your images. Goodbye creativity.
  • You are limited in any further processing which you might want to do, without the danger of deterioration of quality of the image. Every time to revisit the image + resave it with any further alterations, the quality of the image file is suffering.
RAW is not something to undertake lightly, because of the far-reaching consequences, e.g. workflow + storage issues mentioned above. But it has many advantages too. You just have to weigh them up + choose which way suits you when deciding whether to shoot RAW or JPEG. A decent PC is definitely one of the main considerations, because if you only have an old small PC you will need to upgrade it for sure.

HTH
Charlotte is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 23:54   #14 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
JMitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 4,945
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

I think that's a very good summing up. Of course, if you really liked your camera's JPG processing, you could always convert the jpegs to .tiff
JMitchell is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 02:58   #15 (permalink)
Feet under the table
 
j sotelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Diego, Ca. Where the Surf meets the Turf
Posts: 3,235
j sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of light
j sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlotte View Post
Hmmmm I'm guessing Sotelo is not a fan of RAW This will be why he's listed all the pro's for JPEG and con's for RAW but not vice versa. There are pro's and con's for both, but I'm busy at the mo' to list them, and will return later to do so, unless someone else does first.

Re: RAW being a difficult ("non-") format to read, i.e. not universal, we have really progressed beyond that now, and most image editors (later versions) can indeed read and edit the most popular RAW formats, and these are updated as new cameras come out. It is tedious for the software developers, but good for us, the end user. Point being it is no longer the big stumbling block it used to be. Surely the 1000's of photographers who shoot RAW can't all be wrong!

BBL
You are correct I'm not a big fan of raw (didn't say I dont use it ) but raw is very dificult to read. it takes way to much space then theres the xmp sidecar you have to deal with,
anyway I prefer .tif over Raw.
I understand 1000's and 1000's of photographers shoot Raw but theres also some Great ones that only shoot JPG, they usually get it right the first time.
like this one only shoots JPG.
like I said before and Jack proved my point, Raw is for us who fiddle with our pictures.

Last edited by j sotelo; 09-04-2008 at 03:17.
j sotelo is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 03:14   #16 (permalink)
Feet under the table
 
j sotelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Diego, Ca. Where the Surf meets the Turf
Posts: 3,235
j sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of light
j sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMitchell View Post
As per your second comment, I do not think this is true either. Almost all of the time, unless you are in a studio with perfect lighting, and very high quality optics, you will have to edit your images to get the best of out them. Amateurs and pros alike do it, and as I said before, there must be a reason behind it, otherwise noone would do it. Even in the days of film, did you not make adjustments for conrast, and use dodging and burning to enhance the image?
I don't see any of these taken in a studio or retouched or processed at all and they look GREAT.

Don't get me wrong, if you want to use Raw thats great I shoot Raw and/or Fine JPG convert to .tif and dump the Raw. I understand Raw is the complete Raw data straight from the camera.
I'm not against the actual file i'm against the difficulty to store it and carry it in your memory chip.

(BTW Lightroom does a great job in converting to .tif 8 or 16 channels)
j sotelo is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 12:54   #17 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
silkstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Silkstone Common, Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 5,719
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

The main advantages of RAW are that you're not applying colorspace, white balance or tonal/colour corrections in the camera, and the data is (normally) in 12-bit rather than 8-bit format. That means you can stretch the tones - for example, to boost shadow detail - without running into problems of 'blocking' or posterisation.

The drawback is that there's a two-stage editing process unless you use a RAW converter that has all the editing functions you need built in. Bibble and Lightroom are heading in that direction, and may already be there for many shots.

Once you have made the corrections, you can save as a low-compression JPEG unless you need to do further manipulation as a second stage. There really is no point at all in saving as TIFF - especially humongous 16-bit TIFF - if your RAW converter/editor gives you the final result. You can always go back and save in another format at a later stage if you want to.

You should not see any real-world difference between a 16-bit TIFF and a low-compression JPEG on a screen or even in a print. If you do, whatever you're using to generate the JPEG isn't very good. You can also produce a lossless JPEG which is compressed but does not degrade the image at all. JPEGs are much maligned!
__________________
I answer to "Silky", "Paul" and "miaow".
silkstone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 13:17   #18 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
JMitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 4,945
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Much maligned unless you start editing them, and that's where the problem starts. But you're right about RAW editors moving towards a situation in which they have everything you need, so no conversion is necessary unless for web display or printing.
JMitchell is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 15:11   #19 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
silkstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Silkstone Common, Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 5,719
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Agreed, but it does depend on the compression. A lossless JPEG is just like a ZIP file, so you can edit and resave like an 8-bit TIFF. Even with some loss (e.g. quality at 95% in most editors, '5' in PSP) it's surprising how many resaves you can do before there's any noticeable deterioration.

Oh heck I'm starting to sound like Mr Rockwell.
silkstone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 15:15   #20 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
JMitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 4,945
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light
JMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of lightJMitchell is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

You are indeed, just a little. But Mr Rockwell would rather take out a D40 than a D300, so what does he know


(threadstarter: No offence intended, just a little inside joke type jibe [and not at you])
JMitchell is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 15:20   #21 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
silkstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Silkstone Common, Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 5,719
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Ken and me - like peas in a pod don't you know.

But... Jack... Try it. Take a decent JPEG, do a small edit, resave at 95% or higher, close it, open again, do another small edit, save again....

I'd like to hear/see what you find. I tried it a while ago and found that you could resave at least 5 times before seeing any sign of degradation.

In the interests of science and all that....
silkstone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 15:29   #22 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
Markulous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Peak District
Posts: 19,640
Markulous is a jewel in the rough
Markulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the roughMarkulous is a jewel in the rough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Quote:
Originally Posted by silkstone View Post
Ken and me - like peas in a pod don't you know.

But... Jack... Try it. Take a decent JPEG, do a small edit, resave at 95% or higher, close it, open again, do another small edit, save again....

I'd like to hear/see what you find. I tried it a while ago and found that you could resave at least 5 times before seeing any sign of degradation.

In the interests of science and all that....
Some people have waaaaaaay too much time on their hands!
Markulous is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 23:46   #23 (permalink)
Feet under the table
 
j sotelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Diego, Ca. Where the Surf meets the Turf
Posts: 3,235
j sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of light
j sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of lightj sotelo is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: RAW.....?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markulous View Post
Some people have waaaaaaay too much time on their hands!
thats why theres RAW so they can edit and edit and edit LOL.
j sotelo is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:18.


vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ReviewPost & PhotoPost vB3 Enhanced, Copyright 2003-2014 All Enthusiast, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright © 2006 - 2017 Pixalo.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196