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

P

Player

Guest
Just to add, the serious photographers who shot transparencies were sort of like todays serious photographers shooting jpegs out of necessity, like photojouralists shooting jpegs. The beauty of modern photography is that you can shoot RAW and still have a jpeg to go along with it. It's sort of like shooting negatives and tranparencies at once.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Guy, as you said "not everyone wants to be at this level of control" reminds me of the film days. How many photographers just brought their film to the local 1-hour Photo and went happily on their way. On the other hand, myself included, some folks went through the trouble of building their own darkrooms and processing themselves. It's true that many pro photographers had labs process and print for them, but these were usually custom pro labs, under the strict direction of the photographer, so it's always been about quality and control for the serious photographer.
Well I can't begin to tell you how many jobs got screwed up from even the Pro labs. Reason many folks did there own processing. It honestly has not changed that much in a way.

Now most of what I mentioned is just simple facts and not based on my opinion which I try not to impose on anyone. I like to present what I know and let folks decide which way to go. Not everyone cares to shoot raw and that i understand but as most folks get more involved into Photography they start to learn more , get more involved and will work towards shooting raw. To me that is a natural progression in growing as a shooter. Again folks my opinion now is take your time and think and understand about what results you want and how much work you want to do. Frankly i spend a lot of time doing my thing with my files. But many don't want to be behind a keyboard longer than they have too.
 

smokysun

New member
very, very nice explanation, guy. and your last point probably hits the nail on the head. as more and more time has to be spent on the keyboard at work, fewer people want to get home and turn on the computer again. an example, a lawyer friend simply did not want to write any more after writing all day at the office.

the paucity of small cameras with raw is part of the problem. i've the d-lux 2 and i can't think of any other camera pocket-size. (other than newer and panasonic versions of the same.)

a bit up in size: the g3 will take 1200 raw on a 4 meg card (no jpegs). what i would recommend is shooting the raws and then if you like, set up one in lightroom and batch convert the rest.

again, it depends on how much time you want to spend on the computer as opposed to time spent shooting. most of us, i suspect, have to do it within a limited time-frame.

maybe you could suggest some speedy ways people could get the most from their raw files. i'm certainly not against having them.

wayne
www.pbase.com/wwp
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The one thing i do recommend so you really never get caught wanting to have a raw is really shoot both until you decide. Reason being say you shot 300 shots and there are a couple that you really want to print or work on more than through your editing and finding those keepers. This reduces computer time than process all 300 and you still get those keepers as raws. Flash cards and hard drives are so cheap now that it really is not a issue as it was to hold them. So for the time being or even always try doing both for awhile and see what benefits you can draw from that.

Raw processing takes some time to explain and kind of hard to do in the written form. But if you want to start a thread on that great and I will try some of the basic get you going fast stuff. Got to run to a shoot but we certainly can work on that this week.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Guy - and Wayne
What's all this stuff about 'converting' and 'batch converting'.
Why do you need to?
As long as you use one of the modern DAM programs (lightroom or aperture, or even iphoto) you only need to do conversions when sending files to clients, otherwise I don't believe there is any more work involved in shooting RAW than in shooting jpg. As for shooting both - that just muddies the water and gets confusing.

simply speaking
1. shoot raw files
2. copy to a folder on your computer or drive
3. import to Lightroom or Aperture (leaving files in current position).
4. make any adjustments within the program
5. keyword, catalogue files etc.
6. print if desired, make web pages, slide shows whatever.

There is no point where you need to convert, there is no extra work with respect to jpgs, as the workflow would be exactly the same.

I think many people are still stuck in the old 'load and convert' scenario (I used to do it, 5 folders for each shot: raw/tiff/forprint/forweb/thumbnail. Now I have a single folder with the RAW files in it.

Am I missing something?
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I need to deliver images to clients so I process to tiff's than I only do as a service to them small jpegs for viewing and such. Not all my clients or let's say everyone in a company can open a 128 meg tif files just the graphics folks. But the rest use the jpegs for e-mail and such. I only shoot raw myself but for some folks in transition on what they want to do than I say shoot both but if I had my way everyone would should shoot raw but I never get my way. LOL

On the jpegs i just run action in PS from my tifs to a reduced srgb jpeg 8 bit file in a separate folder which takes really no time to do than add that to the master tif's and burn DVD's for them. I never save those jpegs though they get tossed after i burn there DVD's
 

jonoslack

Active member
I need to deliver images to clients so I process to tiff's than I only do as a service to them small jpegs for viewing and such. Not all my clients or let's say everyone in a company can open a 128 meg tif files just the graphics folks. But the rest use the jpegs for e-mail and such. I only shoot raw myself but for some folks in transition on what they want to do than I say shoot both but if I had my way everyone would should shoot raw but I never get my way. LOL

On the jpegs i just run action in PS from my tifs to a reduced srgb jpeg 8 bit file in a separate folder which takes really no time to do than add that to the master tif's and burn DVD's for them. I never save those jpegs though they get tossed after i burn there DVD's
Hi Guy
I realise that if you're delivering files to clients there are different requirements. But for most of us you don't need to even consider any of the exporting / conversion routines if you use Lightroom or Aperture.

It seems to me than anyone who is deciding whether to shoot RAW or JPG is NOT going to be delivering files to clients - and if that's the case, then all of the conversion stuff is completely beside the point.

use Lightroom (or Aperture) shoot RAW, and that's all that's needed.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
use Lightroom (or Aperture) shoot RAW, and that's all that's needed.
I don't disagree, but it might be misleading to someone still on the cusp of deciding to shoot RAW. Technically, if someone follows your path, and decides to send a few photos to a friend or relative via email or post them to this forum, they'll want to convert them to jpegs. Same as when Guy does it for client's internal low res use.

That conversion can take place from within Lightroom (or Aperture) and needs to include a few selected options. Namely, color space, file format and pixel dimensions. These options are presented at the point of conversion or "Export", and they can either be standardized by the user, or modified each time. But however you cut it, it's a conversion.
 

smokysun

New member
for batch conversions i was thinking of when you want a whole series of pics to have a certain look. you can do one in lightroom and then apply this to all the rest then convert the bunch.

before we get completely on-topic! (i think guy has neatly summarized the value of raw). i'd like to clear up an earlier misconception.

cartier-bresson may have already had an eye, but he did not spring fully formed from the head of zeus. he studied for two years with the painter andre lhote who was absolutely bugs about geometry being the basis of composition and he drilled it into his students, henri included.

also there were other influences. henri attended the meetings of the surrealists and was friends with andre breton for breton's whole life. lots of art and design talk must have gone on at those meetings and henri's early work certainly shows a surrealist streak.

this is the book that changed cartier-bresson's way of looking at things, not only in his work but in his life: http://www.amazon.com/Zen-Art-Arche...bs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214851660&sr=8-1

since we all don't have an andre lhote, these are the three books i've found the most useful:

http://www.amazon.com/Photograph-Co...bs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214851772&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Photographers...bs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214851829&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Col...=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214851829&sr=1-9

best,
wayne
www.pbase.com/wwp
 

Terry

New member
Tim,
I agree that you need a conversion. However for me it is one click. I have a folder called getdpi and I export to that folder is srgb, 900 pixels, 75 quality and I'm done. It is a preset. Ok I do get a little fancier sometimes and dump the jpegs into subfolders based on the event.
 
Last edited:

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Very interesting Wayne. Did not realize Henri studied that much in somewhat formal training.

Also yes Wayne I know exactly what you are after on the processing end of working in large numbers and making global changes . It actually is pretty easy once you know some of the steps.

But back to Jono's point yes you can make anything you want file wise from within LR , C1 and Aperture. Actually the old C1 was really cool the Pro version that is . Reason being you could process up to 3 different type files with different parameters all at once going into the same folder. So you could have a high res Tif, Low res jpeg and a Powerpoint size files if needed. This way each file gets all the same treatment but just different formats and sizes. Very cool feature, I am hoping we will see that in the new Pro version as well. Okay off to processing , have a hot rush. LOL
 

jonoslack

Active member
I don't disagree, but it might be misleading to someone still on the cusp of deciding to shoot RAW. Technically, if someone follows your path, and decides to send a few photos to a friend or relative via email or post them to this forum, they'll want to convert them to jpegs. Same as when Guy does it for client's internal low res use.

That conversion can take place from within Lightroom (or Aperture) and needs to include a few selected options. Namely, color space, file format and pixel dimensions. These options are presented at the point of conversion or "Export", and they can either be standardized by the user, or modified each time. But however you cut it, it's a conversion.
Hi Tim
I use Aperture - I don't deny that there are occasions when you may need to do this, but the options are there - and there are defaults for email / web etc. which have sensible default options. Compared to using an action from within photoshop (which is what Guy does, and what I used to do) it's so simple,and you have to make an effort to get it wrong.
 

jonoslack

Active member
But back to Jono's point yes you can make anything you want file wise from within LR , C1 and Aperture. Actually the old C1 was really cool the Pro version that is . Reason being you could process up to 3 different type files with different parameters all at once going into the same folder. So you could have a high res Tif, Low res jpeg and a Powerpoint size files if needed. This way each file gets all the same treatment but just different formats and sizes. Very cool feature, I am hoping we will see that in the new Pro version as well. Okay off to processing , have a hot rush. LOL
But my point Guy is that for most amateurs you just don't need to do this - you want an email? there are sensible email options which put it in an email. You want a web page? you can publish it direct from the progam. You want a printed album? put in your credit card and it's there!

Creating 3 different file types is a nightmare with respect to cataloguing and storage, and for most people it really isn't necessary.

Keep the RAW file and that's ALL YOU NEED.:)
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yes that is true Jono within a lot of the new programs you can just hit a e-mail button and it does it for you. pretty useful features . I know IPhoto has a lot of these features and what i use for clients is load there files in Iphoto after i do my thing which most don't have to. Than create a web gallery for them to download from. Makes my life easier sometimes. Actually have to do that today on a rush job
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The one thing we did not mention which we should is once you have the Raw file stored at some later upgrade point with some of these programs with new and better functions and features you can process them even better with improved software.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
I can see how my post may have been misleading. I was maybe trying to be too literal for someone who has NEVER shot RAW and was contemplating the switch. It's a small point, but those folks need to be aware that you don't use a RAW file for all the various instances mentioned. It simply gets converted from RAW to another format in your software of choice.

And yup, I have one of those folders too that's just for .jpeg conversions for posting or emailing. I do hold onto them and keep them for future use. Saves converting them again.


Hi Tim
I use Aperture - I don't deny that there are occasions when you may need to do this, but the options are there - and there are defaults for email / web etc. which have sensible default options. Compared to using an action from within photoshop (which is what Guy does, and what I used to do) it's so simple,and you have to make an effort to get it wrong.
 

LJL

New member
But my point Guy is that for most amateurs you just don't need to do this - you want an email? there are sensible email options which put it in an email. You want a web page? you can publish it direct from the progam. You want a printed album? put in your credit card and it's there!

Creating 3 different file types is a nightmare with respect to cataloguing and storage, and for most people it really isn't necessary.

Keep the RAW file and that's ALL YOU NEED.:)
Jono,
While I would agree with you that this is pretty much true for most folks, it does not always work for folks that have to go back to shots and reprint them or something like that. In that case, having saved all the various tweaks and adjustments in something like a multi-layered PSD file is important. Further, presently, I do one kind of sharpening for display in Web galleries and stuff, but apply a different kind of sharpening for making prints....and even that is media dependent (canvas, luster, glossy, etc.)

So, keeping just the RAW, even with the preliminary adjustments, is important and can be done in Aperture or Lightroom. But a final version that may have to be reprinted several times and maybe at later dates, does better being stored separately as a 16-bit PSD file with all the various layers and stuff. That is the one place where Aperture (and Lightroom) fall down....they are unable to handle layers of instruction sets that can be tweaked separately, as is done in PS. I hope they find a way to manage that without having to essentially save two, three, six, or however many "versions" of adjustments that are TIFF or PSD files themselves, but without layer access.

I have several clients that have come to me a few years after buying prints and wanting more of those exact prints. If I had not saved the PSD files at the time, I would be struggling to figure out just what I did with adjustments, cloning, etc., to get the final file. If one does not shoot and process things like this, then you are correct, just save the RAW file and whatever adjustment instruction sets that need to go with it.

LJ
 
P

Player

Guest
I'm sure you guys know, but there's a preview jpeg file embedded in every RAW file, a basic quality jpeg, that can be extracted by a free software program:

http://drchung.new21.net/previewextractor/

Whether this might offer an advantage over what's already been discussed, I'm not sure.
 
P

Player

Guest
The point about HCB is that you don't develop an eye like that through study and tutelage alone. The man was supremely gifted and most likely would have developed a similar eye had he been left alone to his own devices.

There are millions of photography students, and millions of photographers studying and being influenced with the goal of improving their eye, but alas, only one HCB.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yes things are a little different from the Pro side of the world. I actually have separate hard drives one labeled RAW and the other FINAL and that is exactly what they are. The finals have all the layers and such and saved as Tif's with layers. There really not even the client files because my tifs in this hard drive are for me, so they are 16bit and all that stuff . The clients sometimes just get a 8 bit Tif and smaller depending on there need and what they can handle but that depends on each clients. But my Final Drive is really the masters. But let's not confuse everyone with what I do since it will be much different than the hobbyist needs but nice to know how Pro's handle the files in storage and such and how they meet there client needs too.
 
Top