| » Forum Index » Problems and solutions » Topic: Raw ver Jpeg |
|
Posted on 20/02/08 6:32:28 PM |
|
vibeke
Kreative Kiwi Posts: 2166 Reply  |
Raw ver Jpeg
It was brought home to me yesterday how much better Raw can be. A friend of mine does school photography, I help her quite a bit with the computer side. I suggested that for her class photographs she set the camera to record both RAW and JPG (largest JPG). First job of the year, a couple of the early photographs where rather over exposed. Have to admit, I was amazed at how much better the correction on the Raw turned out, and how much easier.  |
Posted on 21/02/08 03:41:04 AM |
|
tank172
ThreeDee Thriller Posts: 692 Reply  |
Re: Raw ver Jpeg
There's so much flexibility available with raw if the exposure or white balance is slightly off coming straight out of the camera. The best setting by far  |
Posted on 21/02/08 7:38:24 PM |
|
Nick Curtain
Model Master Posts: 1768 Reply  |
Re: Raw ver Jpeg
Totally agree. I always shoot raw now and have invested in a large external drive to accommodate the larger files. The JPEG is a fantastic invention, but it has limitations when 'pushing' files, simply because it does not contain the same range of information. There are various techniques I use to colour correct a JPEG, but you really need a neutral grey to do this effectively via levels or Curves, whereas with raw you have ultimate control. Raw is excellent when you dont have a tripod and want to combine exposures using the same image, i.e. landscapes. HDR is an answer to this, but personally I think the results look false and there is a danger that one can HDR everything. I believe everyone should use this format if they want the best quality and ultimate flexibility, although there is the downside of speed, particularly if you're shooting an event and blasting off 1000 images plus. Nick |
Posted on 21/03/08 6:25:25 PM |
|
cy98
** Posts: 115 Reply  |
Re: Raw ver Jpeg
Another question on the above. I have played around very little with RAW, but have the following question. On my camera a RAW image is 9 meg and a normal large format jpeg image is 2.5 meg. If I open the jpeg image in camera RAW can you do the corrections with the same end results as a RAW image? My understanding is that most critical viewers can not tell the difference between the two prints until about 16X20 inches. So my question is really about whether there are any editing differences between a jpeg and RAW if both are editied in carmera RAW. Thanks for your insights. |
Posted on 21/03/08 6:37:06 PM |
|
pixelens
* Posts: 34 Reply  |
Re: Raw ver Jpeg
I always shoot RAW, as well. Here is a site with more information on the subject: http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/raw-vs-jpeg/ |
Posted on 21/03/08 7:00:52 PM |
|
vibeke
Kreative Kiwi Posts: 2166 Reply |
Re: Raw ver Jpeg
" are any editing differences between a jpeg and RAW if both are editied in carmera RAW." You can make many of the same editing on a camera Raw and a Jpeg in camera raw. But if you look at my photo at the top you will see if you have an image with major problems you can do a lot more with it if you are editing a Raw image. It took me a while to get comfortable with RAW, but now I wouldn't use anything else. |