RAW vs JPEG

Jordie

Jordie

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,828
Name
Jordie
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

As I am pretty new to Digital photography. Well D SLR's anyway

I am wondering what the difference is between shooting in RAW and shooting in JPEG.

What I do know is that it is a bigger file size. Is that because it has better quality turnouts?

:help:

Thanks for the help in advance.
Jordie
 
With RAW, you get the basic data out of the camera and process it the way you want. JPEG, the camera does it for you.

That's the nutshell answer, I'm sure someone will be along shortly to explain in more detail. Alternatively, search the forum for RAW, therwe have been plenty of threads (and arguments) on here. :D



Edit: Told ya!:lol:
 
A RAW file is basically a digital negative. A file that you can then process yourself in software. A JPG is processed in camera. RAW is the way to go for ultimate flexability but if you just want a quick result then shoot JPG. :)

Have a search around the forums, this topic has been covered many times ;)
 
Monkey said:
noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

dont read ken rockwells site.

:nono:
Click to expand...

Shoot RAW, RAW and more RAW. Do not heed what Ken Rockwell (or should that be Knows Rockall) has written.

Raw is the present and the future :lol:
 
mattyh said:
There are situations for each. It's pointless shooting RAW if you need to print there and then, however, if you want to generate a HDR, then you're better off shooting RAW for the extra bit depth.

RAW is not the be all and end all of photography.
Click to expand...

cant think of a situation when ive ever needed to print there and then.

but if it arose, id either carry a laptop to process, or use RAW+JPEG so atleast i have a RAW image to take home.
 
Personally i couldn't really see the point of blowing a grand on my D300, to then shoot in a format that doesn't allow the camera to record at its best.
 
N00b question:

Suppose you shoot exactly the same shot in JPEG and RAW and then do two non-post processed A4 prints

Would there be any visible difference?
 
MarkydeSad said:
JPEG it is then
Click to expand...

Kind of missing the point of the raw/jpeg difference there. It's not the size of the print that will show the difference but the ability to recover details and correct colours, tones, white balance, etc.

If you're happy with the shots as they come out of the camera then jpeg is the way to go. If you want the flexibility to fine tune then raw is the better option.
 
pxl8 said:
Kind of missing the point of the raw/jpeg difference there. It's not the size of the print that will show the difference but the ability to recover details and correct colours, tones, white balance, etc.

If you're happy with the shots as they come out of the camera then jpeg is the way to go. If you want the flexibility to fine tune then raw is the better option.
Click to expand...

^ what he said

Your question was based on no PP being applied whatsoever..... To give you some idea how much you can do with a raw file.....

If i set my D300 picture control at no sharpening, max saturation to blow all the colours, drop the brightness to -2, and screw the hue up so none of the colours are correct........The shoot RAW+JPEG.

When i load the raw into capture NX it will look screwed, but i can go to the drop down menu and apply the correct picture profile, adjust the sharpness, and then export it......

The jpeg would be unsavable
 
pxl8 said:
Kind of missing the point of the raw/jpeg difference there. It's not the size of the print that will show the difference but the ability to recover details and correct colours, tones, white balance, etc.

If you're happy with the shots as they come out of the camera then jpeg is the way to go. If you want the flexibility to fine tune then raw is the better option.
Click to expand...

if you are shooting outside your comfort zone there is a strong argument for using RAW.
 
Oddly, most people start out shooting JPEGs and then turn to using RAW capture instead to open up the extra processing possibilities.

I'd actually suggest going the other way about it. While you're still getting used to your camera and how it works, save your images as RAW files so you can have the best chance of sorting out any mistakes you make.

Once you know that the shot is going to come off the card pretty much as you want it to be, and you're not really doing any processing anymore..... then that's a good time to start saving JPEGs and saving yourself some time and effort.
 
Shoot whatever you're happiest with, there's a place for both, otherwise the camera manufacturers wouldn't have given us the choice. You'd think they'd know something about it.

Personally I just don't buy all this business about WB, exposure, colour tweaking etc. I shot somewhere between 7000 and 8000 frames over the last week, every one in Jpeg. A mixture of shutter priority, Aperture priority and manual depending on the situation. In that there have been three I've discarded because of exposure issues and they were my fault because I forgot to undo the exposure compensation I'd dialled in.
 
dazzajl said:
Oddly, most people start out shooting JPEGs and then turn to using RAW capture instead to open up the extra processing possibilities.

I'd actually suggest going the other way about it. While you're still getting used to your camera and how it works, save your images as RAW files so you can have the best chance of sorting out any mistakes you make.

Once you know that the shot is going to come off the card pretty much as you want it to be, and you're not really doing any processing anymore..... then that's a good time to start saving JPEGs and saving yourself some time and effort.
Click to expand...

:clap: :clap:
 
dazzajl said:
Once you know that the shot is going to come off the card pretty much as you want it to be, and you're not really doing any processing anymore..... then that's a good time to start saving JPEGs and saving yourself some time and effort.
Click to expand...

If only there was more control over setting up in-camera styles then I'd happily shoot jpeg for most of my work - the Canon picture style editor doesn't do nearly enough. Most of the time I simply load the raw in LR, apply a preset and export.

Hmm, wonder how long it will be before we have the option to install apps on the camera :thinking:
 
Interesting question - i suspect it won't be long. I would think though that there would need to be cross-industry support to develop a common platform like the Symbian operating system for mobile phones.

In camera HDR...?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top