raw ahhhh!!!!

S

sam_51

Suspended / Banned
Messages
264
Name
SAM MOLYNEUX
Edit My Images
Yes
Hope someone could help:eek:
Ive been reading up about raw vs jpeg.
can some one explain for me whether for my use it would be worth me using it. I mainly shoot cars at show's and around about and I was wondering if I was to use raw it would make a difference to the end product as I would hate to think if I could make my shot's better I wasnt doing it.
Also I havent got a clue whats the difference apart from you can edit raw more(and thats all I know):eek:
 
Its not only that you can edit more, but RAW is data not an image and captures everything including all the details in the shadows etc that a JPG would discard with compression so its far better if you want to bring detail out in shots that would be lost otherwise...........you can also change the exposure and white balance etc in RAW which you cannot do in jpg

Fi
 
There are loads of threads about this very subject.
Try doing what I, did set your camera to shoot both RAW and Jpeg ( at the same time)
then compare the images and the amount of manipulation possible to both and make your own mind up
Me? for every day stuff its Jpeg for that extra special stuff its RAW
 
I shoot RAW and a small jpeg. Best of both worlds :)

I then use the jpegs as a quick reference and the RAW id I need to edit
 
RAW everytime - LOTS more control in PP.
 
Think of RAW as the digital negative and JPG as the print you get from Boots. You can make very small changes to JPG but it does bring with it issues in the resulting image. With RAW you are able to make a raft of changes to the image in your digital darkroom.

I've used it before to restore highlights, reduce colours etc and saved many shots. It does add a lot to your workflow in terms of time and storage space but it's a worthwhile trade off in my opinion.
 
if you are shooting car shows indoors its often hard to get the white balance right. with RAW you can always fix it later if you get it drastically wrong

(apologies for repeating this example i posted in another section)

camera gets white balance wrong (very wrong!)
gp6170.jpg


correcting white balance after shooting in RAW
gp6171.jpg
 
The difference between RAW and JPEG is like a difference between a chicken soup cooked from real, meaty chicken with fresh vegetables and the same soup made from a stock cube.

:)

RAW - all postprocessing is on you, you can decide which data goes and what stays.

JPEG - partially, camera decides for you. And usually the choice is not right. :)
 
The proof of the pudding is in the eating: shoot an average, maybe sunny scene in RAW+JPG. Edit both image files to the max of your ability. Put the resulting image files up side-by-side on your screen and SEE with your own eyes, on your own screen, what you can get out of it, at this early stage, without any real experience as yet. Then imagine how it could be if you did learn to work with RAW. Then you will know if it is worth your while to go all RAW or not. Never mind what others can do with it.

Have fun!
 
radiantvision said:
The difference between RAW and JPEG is like a difference between a chicken soup cooked from real, meaty chicken with fresh vegetables and the same soup made from a stock cube.
Click to expand...

Fantastic analogy !!

Made me chortle that did !!

I rarely shoot in raw, but as menitoned previously, if its a special shoot, I will !!
 
Dont know ALL the ins and outs but I read a wothwhile comment somewhere (may have been on here not sure). That was, always shoot in RAW as you never know when you might take the shot of a lifetime and want it as a keeper or blowing up to A3 only to find that jpeg compression makes it look horrible at a decent size. Yes RAW takes up so much room but if you shoot RAW+JPEG for each picture you can later discard the RAWs from the pictures that arent that much good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top