RAW (DIGITAL CAMERAS)

[Zep 0]

I'm just changing from film to digital reflex, I've sent off for a lower end Pentax K110D
to see if I like digital, anyway the question is, is RAW better than JPEG an does it have any advantages over JPEG.

Gone fishing

[shropshire 0]

I didn't know either but just found this... hope it helps...
clicky

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Zep 0]

Thanks Tony, an interesting read I like the look of Adobe light room, probably a little more complicated than my darkroom (as I only do b/w)
The camera will arrive in time to take photos of the Oil seed rape fields coming into bloom,
Last year I could of cursed myself for not having the camera in the car an missed some fantastic shots across the fields of still green wheat the brilliant yellow
of the rape an the sun shinning between the grey of thunderheads in the background,

Anyway hope someone will chime in with some tips on using RAW as I can see a definite advantage over Jpeg

Gone fishing

[shropshire 0]

The rape is in full bloom here (It does look spectacular).. I'll take some piccies over the weekend.

Fancy dinner next weekend?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[grannyinthesky 0]

From what I understand, RAW records more detail about what the camera is taking a picture of which makes for better editing. However, it takes up much more of your memeory than JPEG. It can be a question of quality vx quantity.

"safety first... and What the hell.....
safety second, Too!!! " ~~jmy

POPS #10490

[Conundrum 1]

Always shoot in RAW if you can. During post processing you will have the ability to do more with the photo, you have a lot more data to work with. The JPEG files just don't hold up to serious editing.

[BMFin 0]

Agreed, though I guess most tandem camera flyers will shoot JPEG because its much more time consuming that way..

[mnealtx 0]

OK, here's the thumbnail version:

JPG applies tone curves, WB and other things depending on camera setup to the photograph. It's all "cooked in" at the time you take the pic - editing after that point (except for very minor stuff) can have bad effects on the photo.

That's the downside - the good part is, if you get it right at the time you shoot, you're done.

RAW doesn't "cook in" ANYTHING - you can change exposure settings (w/in reason), white balance, etc... it doesn't become 'final' until you export the picture. It's also the full data as recorded by the camera, instead of 8 bits out of a 12 bit spectrum.

Downside - more work, have to have the computer support/progs for it.

ETA: +1 for lightroom.

Also, check out the "RAW, Post Processing and Printing" subform on photography-on-the.net

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[linestretch 0]

My opinion....if your just blasting tandem pics and don't want to put in any extra work....go jpg.

If you want something to work with and putting more effort in....go RAW. Wish I had started shooting in RAW at first. It is time consuming but well worth it. Yes it takes more memory and the I don't get as many shots in RAW mode, but I'm choosing my shots carefully....not too mention I almost ALWAYS use a flash and it doesn't fire w/ every shot anyway.

my pics & stuff!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

My opinion....if your just blasting tandem pics and don't want to put in any extra work....go jpg.

If you want something to work with and putting more effort in....go RAW. Wish I had started shooting in RAW at first. It is time consuming but well worth it. Yes it takes more memory and the I don't get as many shots in RAW mode, but I'm choosing my shots carefully....not too mention I almost ALWAYS use a flash and it doesn't fire w/ every shot anyway.

Agreed - but the OP doesn't seem to be discussing skydiving photography, but landscape. The extra latitude of RAW really shines in that type of shot.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Cashmanimal 0]

When I was getting into photography, it was explained to me as such:

RAW is like having an entire encyclopedia of information in a photograph, JPG is like having the Spark Notes. Sometimes, all you need is Spark Notes, but if you have the time, why not utilize the encyclopedia?

The only downside I can find with shooting in RAW is the internal memory of the camera can't handle that many sequential shots.

It's a pretty safe assumption that moist people here are using Rebel XT's, XTi's and XSi's for a few lucky ones. In JPG, if you lay into the bite switch you'll get that magnificent shutter firing- CLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICK.

In RAW, it'll be more of a CLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICK....CLICK......CLICK.............CLICK................CLICK

so there will be many great exit shots whereas you get on the ground and wonder why all the other pictures you took on that jump aren't on the card, and realize it's because your camera spent the whole skydive processing the pictures you already took.

The higher end cameras (20D is alright as I understand, 40D is great) tend to handle this better and can process many more photos at a time than the others.

In my experience.

It's all fun and until someone loses an eye... then it's just a game to find the eye

[mnealtx 0]

Agreed, the buffer is much smaller when using RAW - CF write speed plays a part as well, but the camera buffer is the deciding factor, overall. Here's an experiment for you - fill the buffer and see how fast the shutter is tripping - you won't see a whole lot of difference between JPG and RAW at that point, I bet, assuming full size JPG.

*Devil's Advocate: I submit that, if I can't get the shot before the buffer fills in RAW, I've missed the moment and need to get off the shutter, anyway...*

But, again, I point out that the OP is discussing NON-skydiving shots when speaking about RAW...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Zep 0]

Thanks for the replys, An your right I wasn't talking about skydive photography.
When the camera arrives I'm sure I'm going to have fun.

Gone fishing

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Thanks for the replys, An your right I wasn't talking about skydive photography.
When the camera arrives I'm sure I'm going to have fun.

Have fun with it!! As I said above, POTN is a great resource whether you're using Canon gear or not.

*hint: Check out luminous-landscape as well, lots of good tips there. Also check out discussions on "Expose to the right" (or "ETTR") - it's a technique (shooting RAW at low ISO) where you place your important highlights as far to the right in the histogram as possible (without blowing them out), then pull exposure back in your RAW conversion to where it's "properly exposed" - does WONDERS for digital noise and keeping shadow detail. It's the reverse of Adam's "Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights".

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706