What's your technique when out with your DSLR camera? (1 Viewer)

Keith Reeder said:

Ah - so RAW snob bad, jpeg snob good then?

Glad we've cleared that up.



As Steve very eloquently suggests (though I admit I'm putting a personal "spin" on this), if you're such a brilliantly talented photographer that you never, ever get the initial shot more than slightly wrong, then yes, jpeg is fine (I say that - pretty much - in post 10).

For the rest of us, RAW allows so much more latitude in post processing that the slight notional downside implied by that format is a small price to pay.

And I'm speaking as someone with a steam-driven Win ME machine that can't even run many of the latest examples of RAW processing software.

Click to expand...

That post is bordering on the offensive. Not quite, but close.

Let's repeat the actual point in nice small words, shall we?

Raw has advantages in post-processing.
JPEG has advantages in shooting.

Which is more important? Well, it all depends. If you are going for an action shot in good light, JPEG wins by a mile (unless you have a camera that can store raw shots as readily as it stores JPEGs, which is a rare and expensive thing). If you are going for relatively static shots in poor light, raw wins by a mile.

OK, those two situations are easy, there is a clear "best" format in each. But what do you use when the situation isn't clear in advance? You are, let's say, wandering around in some woodland and you don't know what bird in what light the day is going to present you with next. Well, there are two basic philosophies: either you decide to take your chances on missing shots because your camera is bogged down processing raw files, or else you decide to take your chances with the lighting. It is, in other words, entirely a matter of which compromise you feel most comfortable with - but make no mistake, both methods are compromises. Flip a coin if you can't decide any other way.

Naturally, if you have the time and the presence of mind, you can switch between raw and JPEG as best fits each situation you are presented with.

But sneering at people who use the "wrong" file format is not on. Do you sneer at people who drive a different brand of car, wear a different colour tie? For the love of Mike, lighten up a bit and stop preaching at people.

Keith Reeder said:

Hi Max,

to be a RAW snob you need to call it your "workflow"..!

Click to expand...

Spot on, Keith! It's the best single word to come into photography in years to make one sound as if one knows what one is talking about - you can't argue with someone who has a workflow...

Having said that, I'm surprised that you save your RAW files to jpeg - I thought that one of the main benefits was in avoiding jpeg 'artefacting'(another good 'in'-word) by saving as uncompressed TIFFs instead

You're probably right about TIFF, Adey, but I don't take it so seriously yet (nor do I really have the kit to warrant it) that using TIFF figures in my thinking - not to mention the stonking files sizes.

If I had a whizzy PC I probably would though.

Tannin said:

That post is bordering on the offensive. Not quite, but close.

Click to expand...

Hmmm... and it doesn't occur to you that my comment (which you're lucky has a smiley in it - the original didn't) was a direct response to the offence you caused?

You were doing the sneering and the preaching Tannin, not me - you might want to look back at your post introducing the concept of "raw-format snobs" here (oh, and referring to people - that'd be me again - who describe JPEG as lossy, as "silly") before lecturing me about bordering-on-the-offensive postings.

Correction: offensive postings - there's no "bordering-on-the..." about yours.

Thanks everyone for the info on RAW and in particular thanks to Keith.It is obviously a subject that raises the temperature a little.Great!!!

As ususual I asked my last question too quickly because the Raw-Essentials programme I had downloaded had a very good "Readme/Tutorial attached which answered all my questions.

I think I have established a "Workflow" to process the pics and I am now on my way to becoming a "RAW Snob"(However I bet I will still mainly use jpeg).

I am allmost afraid to ask another question but I will :- At the end of the RAW programme I use you are given the choice of saving in TIFF or JPEG.What's the difference and is one better than the other?

Max.

Big question, Max!

I think you'd be best doing some Googling - for example this:

http://www.photo.net/learn/raw/

This:

http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/jpeg-tiff-raw-file-formats.html

And whatever else is out there, drawing your own conclusions about the pros and cons.

FWIW, at my point in the DSLR learning curve, saving as JPEG suits me fine: I still have the unedited RAW file (the "negative") to fall back on if I fancy another go at processing an image (which I anticipate will be the case as I get better at post processing/come across better software and so on).

TIFFs are big files, so saving "finished" images in JPEG means I can wait a while longer before buying more storage, and/or take up less time saving images to CD or DVD.

This approach suits me - I can't comment for anyone else...

Keith Reeder said:

Big question, Max!

I think you'd be best doing some Googling - for example this:

http://www.photo.net/learn/raw/

This:

http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/jpeg-tiff-raw-file-formats.html

And whatever else is out there, drawing your own conclusions about the pros and cons.

FWIW, at my point in the DSLR learning curve, saving as JPEG suits me fine: I still have the unedited RAW file (the "negative") to fall back on if I fancy another go at processing an image (which I anticipate will be the case as I get better at post processing/come across better software and so on).

TIFFs are big files, so saving "finished" images in JPEG means I can wait a while longer before buying more storage, and/or take up less time saving images to CD or DVD.

This approach suits me - I can't comment for anyone else...

Click to expand...

Thanks Keith I do like your point about the amount of space needed for TIFF.

Max.

Max,
All I can add to the good info you received so far is that if you are using PS CS2, or RSE, your adjusted RAW conversion is saved. So whether you decide to continue post processing as a jpg or tiff, you will still have the uncompressed editted RAW file to go back to if you decide you need to do more/different post processing (and I can assure you that the more knowledge you gain about post processing, the more you will go back and re-edit past shots) you can do it easily and save as whatever type file meets your needs.

I realize that Raw versus JPG discussions can get contenscious. I apologize if I added any fuel to this fire :-( As I wrote earlier, there is no right and wrong here. It's more of an available memory and personal choice issue. Depending on what I am shooting (and it's value to me) I shoot both jpg and/or RAW. For example, family shots and stuff like surf shots in good light, or most landscapes, I will normally use jpg. For indoor sports (poor lighting/high ISO), some birds (mainly ones with white and dark coloring on the same bird) and paid gigs, I use RAW.

Basically, RAW is just another feature or tool we can use to get closer to what we desire out of our images To me it's not that big of a deal. I mean it's not important like "what's for dinner tonight?" type questions, for example....lol It sure isn't worth bruising anyone's feelings over.

Just my opinion

Steve

SMC2002 said:

Max,
All I can add to the good info you received so far is that if you are using PS CS2, or RSE, your adjusted RAW conversion is saved. So whether you decide to continue post processing as a jpg or tiff, you will still have the uncompressed editted RAW file to go back to if you decide you need to do more/different post processing (and I can assure you that the more knowledge you gain about post processing, the more you will go back and re-edit past shots) you can do it easily and save as whatever type file meets your needs.

I realize that Raw versus JPG discussions can get contenscious. I apologize if I added any fuel to this fire :-( As I wrote earlier, there is no right and wrong here. It's more of an available memory and personal choice issue. Depending on what I am shooting (and it's value to me) I shoot both jpg and/or RAW. For example, family shots and stuff like surf shots in good light, or most landscapes, I will normally use jpg. For indoor sports (poor lighting/high ISO), some birds (mainly ones with white and dark coloring on the same bird) and paid gigs, I use RAW.

Basically, RAW is just another feature or tool we can use to get closer to what we desire out of our images To me it's not that big of a deal. I mean it's not important like "what's for dinner tonight?" type questions, for example....lol It sure isn't worth bruising anyone's feelings over.

Just my opinion

Steve

Click to expand...

Hi Steve,
Thanks for your comments which appear to be commonsense to me.I will use both in future depending on the conditions and the subject.

Max.

Keith

Many thanks for the download tip to view RAW files in windows. Works a treat and much easier to see what I've taken.

Cheers

Matthew

Good to know, Matthew.

Is there anywhere I can download the raw viewer for windows other than microsoft I can't get it to download it constantly crashes or times out.

I have now managed to download the software and install from another site. Now I can view the thumbnails but thats all, I had to remove net framwork 1.1 which is loaded with the raw viewer, as I couldn't get on the internet. It looks like I will just have a thumbnail view rather than the main viewer.

Is there anyone middle of the road on this topic? Both have their advantages. It should be just a matter of preference, and people who use a certain format should not be criticized for it.

Great thread :loveme:

For a very quick and dirty viewing of RAW files from Canon (.CR2) I use Google's Picasa2.

http://picasa.google.com/

It reads (.CR2) files directly and allows minimum adjustments (without changing the original file) and allows exporting to a (.JPG)

If the picture is something you want to really want to work on the original is still intact for processing with your other favorite program.