confused about RAW

Status
Not open for further replies.
DemiLion said:
As I said, utterly pointless. You can't add data that wasn't there in the first place.

It's a bit like pouring the contents of a half pint glass into a pint one. You don't get any more beer, but it makes you feel better about yourself.
Click to expand...

You seem to be missing the point.

I'm NOT trying to add data but to make sure that editing is as non destructive as possible as the pics go through several stages, including NR, lightening or darkening, sharpening, cropping etc.

It is only when all the editing has been finished that I save the pics, NOT as TIFFs but as JPEGs.

And, after all, no matter whether you use RAW or JPEGs, the final result is always a JPEG if you are going to view it on the 'net or your computer.

.
 
petersmart said:
You seem to be missing the point.

I'm NOT trying to add data but to make sure that editing is as non destructive as possible as the pics go through several stages, including NR, lightening or darkening, sharpening, cropping etc.

It is only when all the editing has been finished that I save the pics, NOT as TIFFs but as JPEGs.

And, after all, no matter whether you use RAW or JPEGs, the final result is always a JPEG if you are going to view it on the 'net or your computer.

.
Click to expand...

It's still pointless. You'd be better off converting to PSD (assuming that you're editting in PS that is).
 
Never shoot in JPEG, always RAWs, a good editing technique is part of photography, and with shooting JPEG, it's the equivalent of using a point and shoot not a DSLR
 
Digitalize said:
Never shoot in JPEG, always RAWs, a good editing technique is part of photography, and with shooting JPEG, it's the equivalent of using a point and shoot not a DSLR
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that's utter tosh if you are using your camera properly. 75% of what I shoot is RAW, but what I shoot in Jpeg certainly isn't the equivalent of using a point and shoot.
 
Digitalize said:
Never shoot in JPEG, always RAWs, a good editing technique is part of photography, and with shooting JPEG, it's the equivalent of using a point and shoot not a DSLR
Click to expand...

Terrible analogy shooting jpeg is much more akin to taking your film to boots and having it developed and printed using the standard process. Shooting a dslr on green square mode is using it like a point and shoot simply because that is pointing and shooting!

Jpeg doesn't rule out editing, limits your options a little but still plenty of tweaks to be done to a jpeg.

Can't stand the snobbery that photography seem to breed at the minute raw is not the be all and end all plenty of pro togs shoot jpeg and would be rightly insulted by your un-thinking throw away comment and photography doesn't gave to be all about sliders in Lightroom 90% of which can be implemented in the field with filters and picture styles.
 
Last edited:
a1ex2001 said:
Terrible analogy shooting jpeg is much more akin to taking your film to boots and having it developed and printed using the standard process. Shooting a dslr on green square mode is using it like a point and shoot simply because that is pointing and shooting!

Jpeg doesn't rule out editing limits your options a little but still plenty of tweaks to be done to a jpeg.

Can't stand the snobbery that photography seem to breed at the minute raw is not the be all and end all plenty of pro togs shoot jpeg and would be rightly insulted by your un-thinking throw away comment.
Click to expand...

Your analogy is much better than mine, I'll admit, or rather, clearer.

Editing JPEG will always be limited, I don't see why you would limit yourself and shoot in JPEG, memory is cheap, why ever do things by half?

Anyone being insulted by me saying that the difference between editing RAW and JPEG is akin to the difference between shooting using a point and shoot and a DSLR, needs to grow a thicker skin. Getting pretty sick and tired of the cry baby nature of people these days, everyone just needs to grow up and not worry so much.

It's cute though, shows you care.
 
Digitalize said:
Anyone being insulted by me saying that the difference between editing RAW and JPEG is akin to the difference between shooting using a point and shoot and a DSLR, needs to grow a thicker skin.
Click to expand...

Some point and shoots can output raw
 
Digitalize said:
Anyone being insulted by me saying that the difference between editing RAW and JPEG is akin to the difference between shooting using a point and shoot and a DSLR, needs to grow a thicker skin. Getting pretty sick and tired of the cry baby nature of people these days, everyone just needs to grow up and not worry so much.

It's cute though, shows you care.
Click to expand...

Suck it up sweetie. You want to make sweeping, inaccurate statements, then you should expect someone to point out the error in your statements.


Digitalize said:
Editing JPEG will always be limited, I don't see why you would limit yourself and shoot in JPEG, memory is cheap, why ever do things by half?
Click to expand...

If you don't know that, then your course isn't teaching you quite as much as you think it is.

I'll give you a clue: speed.
 
Everyone knows that unless you shoot RAW in
manual mode, you're a complete n00b who dare not call themselves a photographer. And £3,000 is the minimum value of kit to take an acceptable photo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top