The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

The benefits of shooting Raw over Jpegs

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
This came up in the small sensor forum and instead of telling folks Raw is better . I think we should explain the benefits of raw first and why overall it is better to start there than shooting jpeg only. I'm actually surprised this topic has not been talked about. I know in the past this was one of the bigger hot topics on forums and many debates over this. I think for folks new into digital we should revisit this. I talk too much so i give this a forum member challenge.
 
D

dlew308

Guest
What's a jpg? :)
I've converted others to shoot in raw. I'm not the best at post processing them but I tell them it's harder to do but worth it being able to PP better. Plus you can also do semi HDR with one raw file, I do it to fix some images.
 
P

Player

Guest
Why is RAW overall better to start with? The same reason that a negative is better to start with than say scanning a print. The RAW file contains all the data the camera is capable of capturing. An in-camera jpeg has altered that original data sometimes in ways that are not expressing the photograph the best possible way, plus you can always create a jpeg from a RAW file, but you can't create a RAW file from a jpeg.

The RAW file puts the onus on the photographer to make of it what he wants, or is able to; a jpeg has imposed limitations, loss of creative control, that you just have to live with. What you see is pretty much what you get (from an IQ standpoint).

This thread seems like a pop quiz. ;)
 
Last edited:

Joan

New member
Well, this discussion started over on the GX200 thread and I have been soundly beaten about the ears for saying I like the jpegs from the Digilux 2 and the Oly E410 well enough to just dispense with the raw files most of the time. :eek:
Blasphemy!! :D:D

I believe this question has to take into consideration what each individual's requirements are in terms of final use for the photos. If you're someone like me who is just getting into this hobby and has a limited budget, there may be a point of diminishing returns. Do I really NEED to spend $200 or 300 on Aperture or Lightroom plus another $700 on Photoshop at this point, or would my money be better spent saving up for some decent lenses? Or taking a workshop? Or just traveling to someplace interesting where I'll find inspiration to USE my camera?

And what about having to buy an external drive to back up all these HUGE files I'll be generating? And the printer, ink, and paper to make great big prints (because if all I'm going to print are 4x6's, surely I don't need the ultimate IQ, right?)

You see where my frustration lies? I can certainly agree that for the BEST possible finished product, shooting raw makes all kinds of sense. But to do this hobby at this level, one needs a lot of the old buckaroos that I simply DO NOT HAVE. Should I just give up on the whole idea, or can I learn and have fun and leave all this high level processing stuff for later? Does it make sense to concentrate on being creative and working towards developing a style and perspective that's unique before I worry about the grand and glorious prints I might make someday? Let's face it, 99% of the crap I've taken to date hardly deserves to reside on my hard drive (except for memories sake) let alone be considered worthy of fine art prints.

OK, I've blabbed enough. Let's hear the rebuttals! :)
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
I think you're just right Joan. Everybody gets where they're going by taking their own path. Or as the sages have said, "it's not the destination but the journey that matters".

Eventually, you may decide to add all the resources you've listed and reconsider RAW. At that point you may even look back at your initial jpegs with a kind of nostalgia. (And for some of those same files, maybe with a twinge of regret that they aren't RAW.)

Best,
Tim
 

Joan

New member
I guess the real question is, "will I ever get there?" LOL Sometimes I think maybe I should try to 'do it right' from the start and follow peoples' advice about shooting raw and learning the whole process. But truly it does seem like trying to spit polish a pig at this point! :ROTFL:
 
P

Player

Guest
Joan, I think whether or not someone shoots RAW is a personal decision, and that decision doesn't influence one way or the other whether or not RAW is more beneficial than jpegs. RAW clearly is regardless of how someone decides to work.

This is an analogy that pops into my head, and forgive me if it's not too good, but I may have always wanted to be a pilot of my own airplane, but I realized that I didn't want to do everything it takes to accomplish that goal, like getting a pilot's license and buying an airplane, so I decide to build model airplanes instead, and fly them in my backyard, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but it's not the same as actually flying a real airplane. But on the other hand, maybe for some other would-be pilot, flying the model airplane is satisfying enough. If that makes sense, if not, forgive me. :)
 

Joan

New member
Right, the analogy makes sense. I don't want to hog this thread regarding my own personal issues, just trying to establish whether it makes sense to delay the expense of the software until later on down the learning path, or bite the bullet and invest in it now and put off spending $$ on lenses and classes, etc..
 
P

Player

Guest
Joan, I hardly think you're hogging the thread, and it's great being able to talk to you, plus, I don't know about anyone else, but it's helping to clarify in my own mind stuff I never really thought deeply enough about, so thanks!

If I may say, I think if you want to get the most out of your photography, the sooner the better, but then again I don't know if lenses or classes would be more beneficial first. You certainly need good lenses, but you could learn this stuff on your own. The Internet is filled with information about working with RAW. I found photonet.com to be an amazing resourse. Just by reading all the posts by Andrew Rodney, and a few other posters, would supply all the puzzle pieces. Best of luck whatever you decide.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
I guess the real question is, "will I ever get there?" LOL ...
I say trust your instincts. Everyone has their own learning style. Lenses and workshops and lots of just plain shooting might be perfect for you. It's not an unreasonable plan to get yourself to a comfort level with the basics before taking on the additional technical requirements and learning curves that go along with RAW.
 

Joan

New member
Thanks for the input guys. I have been waffling about for well over a year just trying to get comfortable with a camera that "works" for me. It's hard not to get caught up in the lust for gear when one frequents these online forums! I've at least narrowed it down to a small list of "wants" in the camera/lens department, so all the trial and error hasn't been completely wasted.

Poco a poco, se va lejos. :) (Old Spanish saying - literally, little by little, one goes far.)
 
P

Player

Guest
Joan, I think TRSmith is right on the money. It's about the process and not the destination, because when you think about it, it really is a never-ending journey with technology and techniques constantly evolving, plus I don't know if the 800 pound gorilla (Photoshop) can ever be mastered. Everyone is still learning regardless of how far along they are, so we're all really in the same boat, just with different challenges. Destinations have been reached, but there are more destinations to pursue. And it's never ending.

And I don't think we can compare ourselves with anyone else, just continue to learn from whatever point you're at, and most importantly, enjoy it. The journey can be as enjoyable from point A as it can be from point C, or whatever. It's all good!
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Right, the analogy makes sense. I don't want to hog this thread regarding my own personal issues, just trying to establish whether it makes sense to delay the expense of the software until later on down the learning path, or bite the bullet and invest in it now and put off spending $$ on lenses and classes, etc..
No ONE can hog a thread. Your expressing what you feel, go for it and the same questions your asking yourself and us is what a million other hobbyists ask. Reason we started the thread was to provide the data for you and everyone else to think about. Also you do not have to spend almost any money on software . There are free programs . Silkypix , Raw Developer and a couple others are free. ( Please correct this if I am wrong) . Anyway this decision does not require you to act all at once either, take your time and figure out all the options.

I was trying to let others speak , but like always have to open my big mouth. But here goes , I think the most important thing for a hobbyist is to decide how far , how much and how much dedication to the art you want to put in. Some folks very little just want to shoot and enjoy what they shot good , bad or indifferent. Others want to take this very far into there process and dedication on how much they want to be involved. I think it maybe fair to say for hobbyists there are many levels ( for lack of a better word) of participation involved in photography. Just need to decide how far you want to go or not. Than you can always change you mind. The beauty here is the hobbyists have all the freedom in the world to decide and do whatever they want . Pro's do not have many choices unless we don't want to eat and frankly I like food a lot.


Joan let me add one thing than I will shut up. Forums like this have many folks from all walks of life and many different needs and/or wants. Some of us love the instant gratification of having the best gear and everything right away( me). Than some take there time and fall in love with it and add stuff over a time period. Nothing wrong with either camp, just don't jump into something that you may regret later and/or to fast for your abilities also. We all like to run before we can walk but a nice leisurely stroll is a good thing also.
 
P

Player

Guest
Guy, I was thinking about my last post, and the one thing I omitted which you expressed so nicely is, "take your time." So what if you're shooting jpegs now and enjoying your photography. It seems that Joan has become aware of the benefits of shooting RAW but she's currently shooting jpegs. That's okay! The RAW thing may have created a crisis for her, but that's good, now she's shooting jpegs with a goal in mind of progressing to RAW shooting, but what's the rush? You don't have to buy all these things at once. If she feels she needs a lens next, get that, and enjoy it, and learn what it can and can't do. Take a class, study on your own, whatever you think is most important and what you can afford. There's no hurry. Just enjoy whatever you're doing, and take your time. Learn about all the raw processors out there, ask questions, take notes. Mull over whether you want go the Photoshop route, or just a stand-alone RAW processor, or a combination of both, then figure-out a way to make it happen.

Someone is not going to be instantly a better photographer because they're shooting RAW. You can improve your technique shooting jpeg as you could shooting RAW. Yes!, "a nice leisurely stroll is a good thing."
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks , One other quick thing if you have a child in school than some educational discounts are available with software . I think CS3 is maybe 199 dollars compared to 800 dollars. So this maybe a avenue for some. Geez i have a 18 year old daughter and I did not think of that until now.:banghead::banghead::banghead:

BTW Great Discussion and everyone should read it
 

LJL

New member
Joan,
As Tim, Guy and others have pointed out, capturing RAW provides the most any camera capable of delivering that kind of file will produce, and give you the most flexibility. However, there are some things that one can do when shooting JPEGs that can have them coming out of the camera looking quite stunning. First, make sure your white balance is correct for the scene you are shooting, and if you can custom white balance, that is the best way to go. It will require doing that for each new lighting setting, but it is so worth the effort. The second thing is to make sure your exposure reading are as good as you can get them....not blowing the highlights, nor clipping/crushing the blacks. Sometimes a 1/3 stop either way can make a world of difference in the final product. Always save the largest (least compressed) JPEG file you possibly can. Memory cards are cheap, and more data saved is better every time. And play around with the camera settings to get your contrast, sharpness and saturation to your liking, and maybe even different for different settings/scenes. If you start doing these things regularly, you will be amazed at how easy shifting to RAW will become, as you are essentially setting things up for as good a capture as you can from the start. After that, playing with RAW files in processing can become both fun and creative.

So, if you have a camera that allows the kind of adjustments discussed, you can crank out superb JPEGs. Many event photogs and others taking high volumes of shots never bother with RAW, but they do bother getting the settings as best they can for JPEGs. That learning process actually makes RAW look easier after a while, and once you shift, you will not want to go back.

LJ
 
P

Player

Guest
Geeze, I hope I'm not talking too much, but Guy, that's a perfect example of finding a way to make something happen. If you have a kid in school that would knock 600 bucks off PS. In my case, I started with Ulead that came free with the original crappy Spider calibrator. Then I tried all the free editors out there and eventually ponied-up for Elements 3. It wasn't until I reached the point that I absolutely knew I needed Photoshop did I buy CS3. The point is don't buy anything until you know you need it. Just because the vast majority of photographers may say, for example, that PS is the way to go, it's not the way for you to go until you understand why it's the way to go. And even then, there are alternatives. Maybe Lightroom, or a combination of LR and the newest edition of Elements, for about half the price of PS CS3.

And have fun!!!
 

smokysun

New member
to play the devil's advocate, i see pretty often people get sidetracked by technology and an image of perfection.

cartier-bresson said, 'i am not interested in photography, i'm interested in life.' and had someone else print his pics

robert henri in 'the art spirit' urges students over and over again to be a master at every stage of the game, to be masters of what they already know. and to only develop (learn) new stuff when they need it to express a specific idea.

the choreographer twyla tharp said, 'all you need when you're stuck is a new idea.'

personally, i think the aim is not perfection but expressiveness.

though i've shot a lot of raw in the past year, for the moment the jpegs from the fuji f30/31 seem to me to often be the most interesting.

if you only show on the web (or mostly), noise, for example, seldom matters.

even in shows. a few of these jpegs shot with a hundred dollar polaroid x530 from the audience: http://www.pbase.com/wwp/blue then blown up into large prints (something like 20x30) for a show of theater photos. out of the couple hundred displayed pics of various sizes, etc., many people liked these the best.

true, having raw files is a nice luxury, but a review of the fuji s6000 said you had to shoot raw to match the jpegs of the f30/31.

ultimately, it depends on your vision, doesn't it?

wayne
www.pbase.com/wwp
 
Last edited:

LJL

New member
Wayne,
Not going to argue with the various philosophies you highlight, nor with the drive toward creative expression. And it is not always about a "perfect" image. But if the image capture is totally lousy and data has been clipped or lost, it cannot get better. On the other hand, if the image contains the most information, the photographer can choose what to discard or use for creativity. HCB's films may not have been perfect exposures, but you can be assured that they were within a range that would allow his lab folks to work with them ;-) Getting it good from the start is a simple discipline that give one the freedom to be as expressive and experimental as they care to be. All of the people and philosophies you mention took much the same approach. Perfect practice permits the most freedom. Bad practice instills habits that are much harder to fix later. One need not be rigid or overtechnical or anything else to create expressive masterpieces, but understanding light and how to use it most effectively to express one's vision comes with lots of experimentation and/or learning.

LJ
 
P

Player

Guest
Wayne, I think it depends what you want to do with photography. If your goal is selling images as stock, for example, then the technical quality is probably more important than the vision. To make an artistic statement, the pendulum could swing the other way. Afterall, a great expressive image is great because of the idea, content, and artistry, but if you're trying to sell deodorant to the masses, the picture needs to clear and technically undistracting.
 
Top