What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is
absolutely FREE
!
Register for an account
to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Forums
Photography, Digiscoping & Art
Cameras And Photography
Technique
Flight photos technique VS still photos
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Stephen Fletcher" data-source="post: 1417103" data-attributes="member: 72820"><p>It is a facility used mainly by professional photographers, shooting large amounts of images, 15,000 or so at a time, e.g. at a big sports event, that need to be selected and transmitted to a head office quickly. The jpg and raw are paired, but only the jpg is looked at, for speed. Any shots that leap out of the screen are saved, and the raw is used for the processing, the rest are binned. For example, Sports Illustrated INSIST their staff photographers use raw+jpg, raw only would slow down their workflow. 15,000 images at 3 a second will still take an hour and a half to review, increasing that time is not acceptable. I know professional bird photographers who always use raw+jpg for the same reason.</p><p></p><p>An amateur shooting for pleasure would just be wasting time and storage space for no reason.</p><p></p><p>This may even be useful and enlightening to some people, and hopefully not toothache inducing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Stephen Fletcher, post: 1417103, member: 72820"] It is a facility used mainly by professional photographers, shooting large amounts of images, 15,000 or so at a time, e.g. at a big sports event, that need to be selected and transmitted to a head office quickly. The jpg and raw are paired, but only the jpg is looked at, for speed. Any shots that leap out of the screen are saved, and the raw is used for the processing, the rest are binned. For example, Sports Illustrated INSIST their staff photographers use raw+jpg, raw only would slow down their workflow. 15,000 images at 3 a second will still take an hour and a half to review, increasing that time is not acceptable. I know professional bird photographers who always use raw+jpg for the same reason. An amateur shooting for pleasure would just be wasting time and storage space for no reason. This may even be useful and enlightening to some people, and hopefully not toothache inducing. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Photography, Digiscoping & Art
Cameras And Photography
Technique
Flight photos technique VS still photos
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top