Using and processing RAW

JackieC

JackieC

Suspended / Banned
Messages
101
Name
Jackie
Edit My Images
No
I haven't been on here for a while, sorry for the absence. :) Plus I am sorry if this has been asked before, but I'm a bit stuck.

I have been photographing since January, and want to play around a bit more. A lot of photographers seem to love using RAW as a format, but I just can't seem to get to grips with it.
For starters, I don't use photoshop. I have tried it and simply find it too complicated, I use picnik which is online, and it seems to suit my needs.
Secondly, I am unable to open RAW images on my computer. I have a Canon 1000d camera, but haven't installed the disc on this laptop I am currently using (it's a new one and I simply didn't see a need at the time). I am presuming the Canon disc would open the RAW images.
As I am currently away from home, I cannot install the disc as I don't have it, nor do I know where it is anyway for when I get back home! I have tried looking on the Canon website for certain codes that I need (not that I really know what I am looking for, anyway), but I seem to have come across a blank.
So does anyone know how I can open the RAW files for free? I don't want to pay for a download, simply because I don't even know if it's worth shooting in RAW, anyway.
Secondly, what advantages does RAW have over jpeg? I know you can correct grain/white balance, but you cannot do that on picnik anyway. Does anyone have any recommendations for editing suites that do this? And is it necessary? Are the pictures better in RAW?
I'd also like to know what peoples opinions on RAW useage is. A lot of people seem to like it.

Sorry, it seems like I am borbarding you all with a lot of questions, but I feel like I have reached an impasse.

Thanks in advance
 
Last edited:
I'd definitely recommend Lightroom 3, I almost always shoot in RAW (Unless I'm snapping trips with friends etc) and find Lightroom great for processing RAW files :)

The main thing about RAW over JPEG is simply for editing purposes as RAW retains all the data from the initial shot whereas JPEGs are processed in your camera.

It sounds to me like you should stick with JPEG and focus on nailing the shot in camera since you aren't a fan of Photoshop!
 
JackieC - this is the download page for Canon DPP, the software that comes eith Canon cameras. Don't know if it's the latest version but I'm sure once installed, it'll prompt you to update if there is an available update to download.

DPP is a good processor and I've seen some great results out of it.

If you want to go further with cataloguing, archiving, processing and outputting, Lightroom is the nuts, although Apple's Aperture is supposed to be equally good (if you are on a mac). If you can't afford the £200 or so for LR3 then maybe look for used version of LR2, which should be fine for your needs.

You say you've tried Photoshop - was that CS or Elements? Elements is a slimmed-down version of PS that is geared towards people who want to tweak their images without the overall features of Photoshop CS.

As for whether images are better in raw than JPEG, it's grey area. For sure, you get a lot more image info in raw but they require processing and they are much bigger files so need bigger memory cards and bigger hard drives ultimately. I shoot a bit of both and in many occasions there's not much in it, although raw comes to the fore when you need to do work on images that have highlights and shadows that just couldn't be tweaked as well if they were JPEGs that had been processed in-camera. Some people mistakenly think that shooting in raw is going to transform their work - in many cases it doesn't - but it does allow you to get a bit more out of the images and recover highlights better.
 
Last edited:
Thanks everyone, you've all really helped me.

Thanks for the links, RobertP. The explaination about RAW really helped me, and also made me realise that jpeg is still the best thing for me to use for 99% of my work. The links to the editing suites is useful.

Thanks for the link to the Canon download page, Specialman. Unfortunately, I need the disc, so I'll have to wait until I get home and try to find it.

IMO, a rubbish photo is a rubbish photo, and even shooting in RAW will not transform it into something magical! :lol:

Thanks again for the info, people. I'll have a good look when I get home. For now I am going to enjoy my last full day on my holiday xx :)
 
I'd say definitely try the Lightroom trial. I really have no interest in "photo editing" (cropping, cloning etc) but it's often the case that the White Balance needs a small tweak and exposure needs a small tweak or some photos benefit from a different tone curve.

Shooting jpeg is more work as it means everything needs to be "nailed" at the point of taking the picture whereas raw allows to to make changes later "at your leisure".
 
DPP is in many peoples opinion the best raw editor for Canon raw files (and it's yours for free).

If you're expecting great results from your photography and not shooting raw, how are you managing your colour balance?:

a, a colorimeter
b, custom white balance
c, auto white balance

If the answer is c, and you see it as 'good enough' then you're still at the stage trainers refer to as 'unconscious incompetence'; ie you do not know what it is that you don't know.

If the answer is a, or b, and you're diligent in all your other techniques, you probably have nothing to gain from shooting RAW.

Shooting RAW can't improve your composition, timing, focus technique, lighting, exposure technique, but it makes your colour management easier and can add a little help with your exposures (with less degradation than with a jpeg file).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top