Why RAW

[Nicola.P]

Seen RAW mentioned alot and just wondered whats different about it and why people use it. Looking at the workflow thread about uploading alot of people seem to take pics in RAW and then convert straight away after uploading into something else, so I am just confused why shoot in RAW in the first place?

Also what is HDR seen that mentioned too?

 

[Galaxy66]

Nowhere capable of giving an answer as good as some you will receive but if I was wanting an answer to why shoot raw I would google and bring this up.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml

 

[sportysnaps]

RAW
is a way of getting the best quality from a photo, but also may include the most amount of work on the part of the photographer, so may not be best suited to the novice or the photographer, that either does not have the knowledge or the time to spend on the images - an example of someone not wanting to use RAW would be a press or event photographer such as myself.

HDR
is a way of getting the best out of low and high light situations to get the best of both worlds - but often leads to a false reality photo that is either loved hated by photographers - if used wisely can create really stunning photos - but often creates images that are a bit of art rather then photos, as they create an image that is different to what the human eye sees.

 

[DollyBuster]

why shoot in RAW in the first place?

Because you get better images if you edit RAW files instead of using out-of-camera JPGs.

Also what is HDR seen that mentioned too?

HDRI = High Dynamic Range Imaging is the stacking and blending of differently exposed but otherwise identical images in PP. You then get a composite image with a much wider contrast range than a single image can capture.

Have fun!

 

[CT]

The advantage of shooting in RAW is that parameters such as white balance and sharpening aren't applied in camera, so you have complete control over those at the editing stage. Also, even if you do no editing in RAW you output a 16 bit TIFF image as opposed to a jpeg which is only 8 bit, so contains a lot more image info. RAW images are also much smaller than TIFF images when saved on your hard drive. If you keep the RAW image, you can always return to a completely unedited version of your image if you wish.

HDR means High Dynamic Range, and is achieved by combining a number of images at different exposure settings into a single image which contains a far greater range of tones than would be possible with a single exposure.

 

[Galaxy66]

Never asked that question myself, now I know

 

[Jamougha]

Shooting raw makes it easier to fix white balance. More importantly your sensor records more information about highlights than the standard jpeg conversion so you can recover what would otherwise be blown highlights.

 

[santana007]

Raw

in a nut shell , a guy did a wedding and by mistake shot it in jpeg and tungsten,
he asked in a mag what could he do . convert them to black and white was the answer .:bang:
if he had shot in Raw all data would be saved within the file and he could have rescued the day .
they fill flash cards quick . so 2 to 4 gig cards .

best thing to do is shot 2 shots 1 jpeg and one raw . you will see the difference for yourself

rog

 

[DollyBuster]

RAW and HDR are a golden combo: from a RAW file you can create, in good software, say 3 image files, preferably TIFFs, over a 4 stop range (+2, 0, –2). Which are perfect material to use for HDR.

HDR is like silicone breast implants: if it is done well you don't see that is was 'done', if it's a cheapo botch job the end result is awful sadness.

 

[Nicola.P]

So do you need certain software to deal with RAW or does windows still manage to transfer it and can Elements 4 support it?

 

[curtisuk]

if your camer does raw you will get it with it
or you could use Adobe Lightroom

 

[Garry Edwards]

As other people have said, raw produces better quality and allows you to make the decisions.

JPEG is fine for some types of photography - news, sport, events etc where there are just too many shots to allow easy use of raw, and where conditions such as colour temperature can be tested. It's also fine for people who never make mistakes, but for people like me raw is a much safer as well as a better option

Raw used to be just too difficult back in the early days of DSLRs, when memory cards cost £1 per megabyte and computers used to clunk along at 5 mph - but times have changed. Also, back in 2000 or so, nearly everyone who used digital also had experience of film and had had to learn the basics of colour temperature and exposure, so were more likely to get things right.