Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-19-2009, 11:06 PM   #1
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,092
Why I shoot RAW...

Some people new to all this stuff sometimes wonder why... It was a bit over 2 years ago when I was wondering why.

Well, I shoot RAW+ actually. Which means a JPEG is generated. But I rarely even look @ the JPEG. After finding the best focused version of a photo I took a bunch of shots of, I happened to look at the JPEG out of the camera. It reminded me of just why I shoot RAW and spend so much time performing painstaking post processing...

Out of the camera, with 5 miles of moist air between me and the primary subjects that so interested me (of the towers and partial obstruction by the steam):


RAW post processed in Lightroom to the way my mind remembered my eye seeing the scene thru the viewfinder lit by the setting sun to my left:


Hope this helps the new folks wondering "why RAW?".


Last edited by m8o; 07-14-2010 at 08:14 PM. Reason: added a line return before the 1st image
09-19-2009, 11:10 PM   #2
Veteran Member
heliphoto's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Region 5
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,539
That's a beautiful (if scary) image.

I think you might have got it there from a jpg, but I shoot RAW too so I hear ya on that point.
09-19-2009, 11:24 PM   #3
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,092
Original Poster
You bring up a good point. I figure I'll also share that I learn two important things regarding post-processing JPEGs to keep in mind for any considering it.

1) Oversharpening... the Pentax's in-camera software actually does a very decent job of sharpening. It does however use a small radius. If one want to accentuate the darks as I did in this photo above, to really bring-out the wires holding-up the antenna on the right, that's best done with a very large sharpening radius. I think I used 2.5 in this photo. I usually only use 0.7 - 1.3. Other then that, even applying light, small radius sharpening to a JPEG in Lightroom will just be too much sharpening of the JPEG.

2) Hot pixels... My camera with over 20,000 activations suffers from it terribly it seems; use a long shutter speed and I'd say I get 100's if not thousands of hot-pixels. And the Pentax in-camera conversion doesn't eliminate it at all. It keeps the seriously 'off color' hot-pixel there, and you'll also get some pretty noticeable sharpening artifacts around it. (While the in-camera sharpening does well with normal subjects, a hot-pixel always gets a halo around it.) However Lightroom handles a super-bright off-color (both, when compared to all the pixels around it) single pixel hot-spots fantastically, and completely excises the hot pixel. If memory serves me well, you can't apply that noise reduction to a JPEG in that program, let alone undo the sharpening artifact that was caused by it.

09-20-2009, 07:08 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,514
I took the jpg and pushed it as far as it would go, it was impossible to get it to match effectively.

jpg shopped to hell and back:


raw:


you can see the raw has better WB and dynamic range and contrast.

I'm actually surprised at the result, because when I started editing your image it did it with the intention of showing that your image was not really suited to showing off raw capability properly...


Last edited by WerTicus; 09-20-2009 at 07:13 AM.
09-20-2009, 10:25 PM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Posts: 165
m80, you are correct about the ability of RAW to allow you to do the near impossible. It is also worth mentioning that while you can do a lot in LR2 with JPG the penalties for going to the limit are severe.
Blown highlights do not allow too much lightening a seriously dark image, Large adjustments to gamma will lead to banding, LR2 or ACR 5 can process the image in Adobe RGB or even a higher colour space such as ProPhoto. Although you cannot correctly display the image on the agerage monitor not print it LR or ACR can export the image in sRGB or Adobe RGB. My Highend Epson printer can make good use of AdobeRGB.
If you print directly from LR2 it will do an excellent job of down-mixing the image to whetever the printer driver can handle. I get excellent prints with almost 0% failure rate.
For what LR2 cannot do YET edit the image with the LR adjustments and seamlessly return to LR2 for further work if needed.
08-19-2010, 07:30 PM   #6
Veteran Member
mysticcowboy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: port townsend, wa
Photos: Albums
Posts: 968
The other big advantage of RAW over JPEG is the ability to process in 16 bit instead of 8. Where there are subtle gradients of color it's real easy to push JPEGs so far that they band. 8 bit color space allows for 256 levels of gradation. 16 bit has 4096. That's a huge difference.
08-19-2010, 07:35 PM   #7
Veteran Member
mysticcowboy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: port townsend, wa
Photos: Albums
Posts: 968
QuoteOriginally posted by WerTicus Quote
I took the jpg and pushed it as far as it would go, it was impossible to get it to match effectively.

jpg shopped to hell and back:


raw:


you can see the raw has better WB and dynamic range and contrast.

I'm actually surprised at the result, because when I started editing your image it did it with the intention of showing that your image was not really suited to showing off raw capability properly...
Use the Photoshop Channel Mixer to reduce the red saturation and you can make the JPEG real close. This example isn't really about RAW vs. JPEG as it about preferring his own processing over a default camera setting.

For a more realistic comparison see the article at:
Raw vs. Jpeg, the real story.

08-19-2010, 07:57 PM   #8
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,092
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mysticcowboy Quote
Use the Photoshop Channel Mixer to reduce the red saturation and you can make the JPEG real close. This example isn't really about RAW vs. JPEG as it about preferring his own processing over a default camera setting.
Not that being able to perform my processing over what the camera does isn't a valid reason to do raw processing, but, I have to take issue saying this isn't a 'realistic' example. There isn't a single processing option in Lightroom developer mode, many of which aren't even available in-camera, that isn't used. And I'm processing the RAW rather than JPG to achieve every advantage mentioned in that article, not by accident but knowingly and on purpose. So because it's not a pointless still-life test shot means it can't serve as an excellent example? Weird logic.

I'd love to see it, because I'd love to see how you'll get the same sharpness in the steel tower cross members w/o sever halo'ing. (besides, all this should be getting done to the full rez, not the 'shrunk' JPG re-sized by Flickr). What I shared here was probably pushed a little too far already. Applying that type of sharpening to 'Flickr-cooked' JPEG would result in much more noticeable halo'ing. I'm also hoping to see how reducing red will bring the JPG close, as it's the excess of 'blue' (and haze) that veils the JPG (and that doesn't address the shadow noise).

Don't overlook something else I posted. I don't know if your camera produces thousands of hot-spots yet (probably doesn't), the worse the longer the shutter. Once even the lowest in-camera sharpening is applied, an unmistakable donut is produced around the hot pixel. No amount of post in Lightroom gets rid of that. So that pretty much mandates I have to process RAW. I'd have to check that in PS now that I bought CS5 64-bit; perhaps that can take care of it.

Last edited by m8o; 08-19-2010 at 08:49 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, jpeg, photography, photoshop, post
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do you shoot in Raw Vs JPeg?? Softsoap Photographic Technique 14 02-25-2010 02:52 PM
Why I shoot Raw (2 imgs) sajmmiller Post Your Photos! 12 07-10-2008 06:50 AM
How To Shoot Raw!!! NYpHoToGraphEr Pentax DSLR Discussion 22 10-24-2007 11:46 AM
idiot (read: glad I shoot in RAW) khardur Pentax DSLR Discussion 1 04-09-2007 05:08 PM
Why do I lose all exif info when I shoot raw fevbusch Pentax DSLR Discussion 28 03-01-2007 09:33 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:36 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top