- Messages
- 4,152
- Name
- Carl
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Are they married then?
Beginner's questions. Raw or J Peg, and edit advise.
- Thread starter Oldbones
- Start date
- Messages
- 83
- Name
- sebastian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Barby is a very flexible women.
Mentally and physical.
- Messages
- 5,845
- Name
- Lee
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Raw file is processed by the camera
If you go on a trip with a girlfriend/wife/husband/partner/friend and you don't want them looking at your images on a shared computer. Shoot raw. Only specific programs can open them. Just about anything can open a jpg.
Damn... What a strange comment.......
Anyway OP..... Shoot both if you want to. Then you can decide which to use & eventually which to bother shooting. I've only ever shot RAW on my Sony kit since.... 2014/15 & on Canon 5D2 before that. I did start shooting Raw + jpeg with my X100f this year but I've switched that out to RAW only now too as it just fits in with my workflow tbh.
- Messages
- 4,657
- Name
- droj
- Edit My Images
- No
A bold (or indeed bald) statement (meaning less than informative, just to be clear). Your rationale being ...?
Utter blather. What on earth boosters are you on, baby?If you go on a trip with a girlfriend/wife/husband/partner/friend and you don't want them looking at your images on a shared computer. Shoot raw. Only specific programs can open them. Just about anything can open a jpg.
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 17
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have downloaded the Nx editor watched the instructions on the posted video and had a wee bit of time useing it..
Thank you so much folks for the stunning response to what I thought was a simple question.
Looking into external storage now.
Think I will do a few raw pictures and try that.
Loads of opportunities for me around where I live, sea and countryside is all around me.I
Now have to properly organize my folders on my old laptop and sort through the pics I do have, most of them are fishing and fly tying.
Thank you, it is very much appreciated.
Thank you so much folks for the stunning response to what I thought was a simple question.
Looking into external storage now.
Think I will do a few raw pictures and try that.
Loads of opportunities for me around where I live, sea and countryside is all around me.I
Now have to properly organize my folders on my old laptop and sort through the pics I do have, most of them are fishing and fly tying.
Thank you, it is very much appreciated.
Nod
Tootles
- Messages
- 46,428
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just as an exercise, after you've processed a few raw files to where you're happy with them, give someone a set of prints with your processed raws and the camera's JPEGs and see which they prefer WITH NO COMMENTS FROM YOU. You might be surprised!
ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 24,523
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
It's interesting to see whether the jpg or raw edits are preferred. I seen some comments previously about users struggling to make their raw edits as 'good' as the jpg files. For me, the digital image from the camera, whether jpg or raw, has always been the starting point like a film negative. However raw images always have more flexibility for adjustment. Not everyone likes doing post processing, and if that's the case then it may be better to settle on jpg files eventually.
- Messages
- 83
- Name
- sebastian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I remember reading photography magazines from both Canada and the U.K on this very subject in the spring of 2008. RAW or jpg. And everything covered on this thread they discussed. Laugh out loud.
I went the hard way and took raw and jpg's. In hindsight I should have just gone for Raw files. But since then I've spent massive amounts of time on photography and Photoshop. My significant other is Photoshop. The best advice is to set your phone to a stop watch and record how long it takes for you to process an image for the first time. A new image you haven't processed before. Then reset the clock and do it for a jpg. You could do it ten times more and calculate your average time to process a raw file. \
In the film: Enemy of the state. A nature photographer motivated to take video of migrating birds places a video camera in a camouflaged box in a wooded area across from a boat launch. In the film a government official gets assassinated and it's recorded on this camera sensor.
Now lets change it to a camera instead of a video recorder. And it was set to take RAW images. Thank goodness. I took raw. I was able to push the envelope and turn down the highlights caught off the water. Now you can see clearly it is the official. But how often does this happen? What if I realize years later I took a really good picture and my skills have developed enough I can edit it way better. What if I didn't know it was a good picture and someone looked through my forgotten pictures and wants to enlarge it 4x and print it.
With photoshop you can save presets[bridge(camera raw presets)]. And after while. I have about 30 presets that work for almost any image but for the most creative. And I have recorded actions in photoshop to make things progress faster when working with more then a few photographs at a time.
All it takes is to spend an hour a day for 5 years and you will become a professional. They say that about musical instruments, but that can apply to anything. Me. An hour a day in Photoshop for 20 years. And I still don't use everything photoshop has to offer all the time.
- Messages
- 9,323
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Agree with you there, a big reason for going Raw is that editing software is improving all the time , as I mentioned before I can go back to a shot I took years ago on my Canon 350D and run the Raw through DXO photolab and it brings new life to the images
- Messages
- 472
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've always shot Raw since taking up photography and it's actually taught me to think more about my exposure and in turn taught me more about what's needed to get the final image I want.
For example, if I'm looking at a scene or shot I've got my probably post processing workflow in my head. If there's harsh highlights I'm thinking do I want to clip them, keep them or move entirely to change the composition to make them less of a factor. Having the thought in mind of processing the Raw actually makes me connect more with what I'm doing and I absolutely love the creative process of taking something and making it my own in post.
That's me though, some will of course think that's a massive waste of time and the camera does a good enough job.
For example, if I'm looking at a scene or shot I've got my probably post processing workflow in my head. If there's harsh highlights I'm thinking do I want to clip them, keep them or move entirely to change the composition to make them less of a factor. Having the thought in mind of processing the Raw actually makes me connect more with what I'm doing and I absolutely love the creative process of taking something and making it my own in post.
That's me though, some will of course think that's a massive waste of time and the camera does a good enough job.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 478
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I shoot both so I have jpeg and RAW for every photo I take. For a quick upload I'll just use the jpeg, but for a bit of sharpening and colour alteration like say a white car under a blue sky I'll use the RAW file in the RAW editor to painstakingly remove the blue hue from the white paintwork.
To simply view my photos for the day I use Windows Photos. NOTE: Windows Photos adjusts the RAW file it displays to what it thinks it should look like (fun if you are not expecting it to happen, but it doesn't save anything so the RAW file is never actually altered!) but it displays the jpeg as is.
For cropping to frame better or pick out the part of the picture I intended to shoot as the main subject in the first place I also use Windows Photos. I 'kinda like it for that although I do have a 50.1 megapixel camera with top notch lenses so I can crop right in there and still have fantastic final image quality for 4k monitors.
To simply view my photos for the day I use Windows Photos. NOTE: Windows Photos adjusts the RAW file it displays to what it thinks it should look like (fun if you are not expecting it to happen, but it doesn't save anything so the RAW file is never actually altered!) but it displays the jpeg as is.
For cropping to frame better or pick out the part of the picture I intended to shoot as the main subject in the first place I also use Windows Photos. I 'kinda like it for that although I do have a 50.1 megapixel camera with top notch lenses so I can crop right in there and still have fantastic final image quality for 4k monitors.
- Messages
- 9,880
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Raw file is processed by the camera
If you go on a trip with a girlfriend/wife/husband/partner/friend and you don't want them looking at your images on a shared computer. Shoot raw. Only specific programs can open them. Just about anything can open a jpg.
you are missing some nuances.
a RAW image will have been processed by the cameras chip to convert the signals of the 20 or so million pixels into the camera companies standardised file format, but its not intended to be a finalised image and requires adjustments before an acceptable image for use is achieved.
An camera JPG will process the image to various presets designed by the manufacturer, with possible some slight tailoring to those presets by the camera owner.
Pound Coin
Horatio Nelson
- Messages
- 4,429
- Edit My Images
- Yes
… and the jpg will have thrown away a significant amount of data that the RAW had/has
ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 24,523
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
I quite understand. My last laptop for editing was 9 years old when it was retired, and the only upgrade it needed before replacing was a bigger hard drive (twice: 1TB, then 2TB).
Garry Edwards
Moderator
- Messages
- 12,547
- Name
- Garry Edwards
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes, good choice.
Storage is so cheap and solid-state reliable now. I use a plug-in drive to auto back everything up, https://www.ebuyer.com/1883483-kingston-xs1000-2tb-portable-usb-c-ssd-sxs1000-2000g, can also be used as an external hard drive of course
OP
- Messages
- 17
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That looks like a good price, I will have a look at them tonight.
- Messages
- 2,840
- Name
- Kev
- Edit My Images
- No
My laptop went 2 weeks ago, it was out of guarantee as I bought it in 2010!
I can't believe how fast the new one is.
The posted picture could do with straightening and once you get used to colour control points you will find that you can do a lot with it.
I can't believe how fast the new one is.
The posted picture could do with straightening and once you get used to colour control points you will find that you can do a lot with it.
- Messages
- 81
- Name
- Annet
- Edit My Images
- No
As others said, raws offer more flexibility in editing, so shoot in both and use raws for post-processing and JPG to send them to your clients if they are to pick the photos for further editing (that's what I usually do). Softwarewise, Rawtherapee is great and so is Photoworks. Darktable is also good, but I haven't used it a lot, so can't really comment on this one. My advice re:software would be to try everything that looks remotely good and pick something which is the best for you.
- Messages
- 2,840
- Name
- Kev
- Edit My Images
- No
My wife uses the laptop for word processing and surfing the net so I just went for the cheapest Dell Inspiron 15. It only has 8GB ram and 256GB SSD so not too good for photo processing or storage,
I do use it for backups from my desktop but I already had a 1TB external SSD connected to the laptop for my pictures
I am sure that if you post on here in Talk Computers section you will get loads of advice, or just use the search facility as the question about which laptop to buy comes up regularly.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,141
- Name
- John 'Jack'
- Edit My Images
- No
That often depends on what subject you are shooting.
While it is true that RAW is better than JPEG, mainly due to the fact that RAW, as the name implied, is simply a raw material photo, so you can apply the right white balance, colours, and all those stuff afterwards in a computer. Whereabouts JPEG have the white balance, colours, etc., all processed in the camera. So if you get the white balance set up wrong, then your photos turn out with the wrong colours, and you'll be needing a computer to edit it anyway.
But here's the rub: RAW files are bulky, eats up lot of storage space, and often slow down the camera's shooting speed. Not the shutter speed which stays the same, it's the buffer rate that gets lowered.
Which is why, it's up to you to chose which to use, RAW or JPEG depending on the subject.
Generally as a rough rule of a thumb...
Any fast moving subject, like sports action, journalism, events, etc. Where you want faster shooting rates, you would be better off trying to make sure you get the white balance set up correctly, then take the shots, and worry about any wrong light levels afterwards. You don't want to miss that chance the football player scored the goal simply because your camera tells you the buffer is full, and you'll have to wait for it to write the RAW files to the memory card.
But otherwise, any slow or stationary subjects, like portrait photography or landscape, nature, architecture, etc, you can use RAW. Of course, you would want to set up white balance and stuff before start of shooting, but you don't need faster shooting rate, it's not like you're in a hurry to catch this moment, for example: a building is still there, it didn't move like a football player did, therefore you can use RAW and not worry about it slowing down your shooting rates.
While raw are larger than jpeg, image sizes have increased far less than memory capacity - both for memory card sizes, buffer sizes and long terms storage. It's become increasingly easy to handle the additional size of raw files over jpeg.
Note also that it's not the buffer rate that reduces, it's the larger size of the raw files that fills the buffer more quickly - but again, buffer sizes have increased significantly - my old 24Mb A900 could shoot 5 fps, and had a buffer of ~11 raw files, the CF cards I had could hold perhaps 600 images.
My A7iv is 33Mb, shoots 10fps, the buffer can hold 800 raw files, and the cards can each hold over 2000 raw images.
No reason on space or speed not to shoot raw these days.
Last edited: