I think I am getting Lazy ?

vievetrick · 10-20-2007, 07:49 PM

So about a month or so ago I switched the K10 to shot Jpg+Raw. I can't remeber why but I have not switched back since. I switched to shooting just RAW about a year or more ago and thought I would never go back to shooting just jpg. Now the lazy part, or maybe not. I really have noticed that I am liking the not having to convert the Raw to Jpg. Actually a big percentage of shots I am very happy with both exposure and sharpness in the jpg's. There are still a few I have to tinker with and convert but overall my time on the pc has been improved a bunch. Not sure what I am trying to say but anyone that has issue with the jpg's out of the k10 has I guess a higher standard then me. I am happy I have the back up of the raw file but I think for a while I will stick with this. Anyone else find themselves going back to jpeg after going to RAW.

Peter Zack · 10-20-2007, 08:05 PM

Maybe a little different take on this. I won't get into the Jpeg vs RAW thing again because it's been beaten to death and frankly Jpegs are just fine the vast majority of the time. If you're shooting for poster size and selling your work to a magazine well then maybe.

Now as for the Lazy question. I found myself doing the same for awhile. Thinking oh well I can fix the exposure and crop it differently at home. Then I noticed the quality of the shots diminishing. Stopped using the tripod and depending on SR too much and lots of other things.

So back to basics. Following the rules of thumb. Take more time to compose and expose the shot better. I still love Tav and Hyper program but for me shooting manually and manual AF when I can as well has vastly improved the end result.

In other words go back to how I shot with the K1000. All manual, no SR, can't change ASA (ISO) too much without changing rolls. Compose more carefully because each shot cost money.

now I'm back to trying to think old school and the shots show. Digitals can make you lazy very easily and this thread is a great reminder to not move too far from the old school rules that have served photogs well over the decades.

It's nice to open the file on the card and not have to spend 20++ minutes to fix each shot. Also more satisfying to think "I took that shot, not the computer"

Mr Hyde · 10-20-2007, 08:27 PM

Originally posted by vievetrick

..... Actually a big percentage of shots I am very happy with both exposure and sharpness in the jpg's. There are still a few I have to tinker with and convert but overall my time on the pc has been improved a bunch. Not sure what I am trying to say but anyone that has issue with the jpg's out of the k10 has I guess a higher standard then me.......

I had my portrait stuff set up to take shots of my kids for their homecoming dance. Since it was up anyway I decided to take some shots of some of my guitars. I shot them raw+jpg just to compare. Maybe it was the lens but even at 100% crop I really didnt see much of a difference between the two. I do have the K10D set for +2 Sharpness and +1 contrast so maybe that's why.

ddhytz · 10-20-2007, 08:37 PM

Originally posted by Mr Hyde

... I really didnt see much of a difference between the two. I do have the K10D set for +2 Sharpness and +1 contrast so maybe that's why.

How about change to default and compare again?

Mr Hyde · 10-20-2007, 10:13 PM

Originally posted by ddhytz

How about change to default and compare again?

Those comparisons have been done over and over again and I'm sure my results will mirror those already obtained by everyone else. There are som einstances where RAW is a better option for me but for the most part JPG suits most of my needs. when in doubt I'll push the raw button.

**Marc Langille** · 10-21-2007, 06:55 AM

I've taken many JPEG's and been VERY satisfied with the results. Set to Bright Mode of course...

However, I it's easier for me to shoot RAW, in case an image is submitted for print (doing some articles - hopefully). They want a min. of 240 dpi, preferably 360 dpi, because of the print process. They normally print 300 dpi, but prefer to be able to downsize, instead of upsize. In photoshop, min. 8.3 inches on the long side, 10 is better, so you cannot crop a lot!

You should see their scanned film/slide requirements...

vievetrick · 10-21-2007, 08:54 AM

Not at all trying to stir the RAW Vs. JPG thing more like just thinking out loud. I am sticking with I am getting Lazy and happy with what I got and know I have a back up to work with.

Photo Tramp · 10-21-2007, 01:27 PM

Hi Pat,
Could it be that in switching your process you have found more time for the enjoyment of the hobby? But then again with no processing and more time to enjoy, If your wife find's out she may have you doing more around the house.

Be careful my friend don't let her know your not busy.

vievetrick · 10-21-2007, 05:39 PM

lololol good point Dave

JahJahwarrior · 10-31-2007, 02:13 PM

When I shoot in raw, I almost never bother to make .jpgs or do anything with them. I have tonnes of raw shots I've never even looked at....

So, I shoot in raw when it's important, and .jpg when I'm just taking pictures.

foxglove · 10-31-2007, 04:35 PM

Originally posted by Peter Zack

It's nice to open the file on the card and not have to spend 20++ minutes to fix each shot. Also more satisfying to think "I took that shot, not the computer"

Good point! With the K100 I don't have the option of jpg+raw, and I like the option of rescuing my screw-ups and/or printing large (not that I have done much, but I could...

) so I shoot raw. The images I'm happiest with are the ones that I can zip through camera raw in under 30 seconds, just tweak a few settings, maybe a little crop if needed, then into photoshop just to resize and sharpen. Then I know I got everything I could reasonably correct in the camera, and I feel, as you say, that I took the picture, not the computer.

That said, I do enjoy mucking around with an image sometimes, but usually because I think it's a good image in the first place, not a complete rescue job. I suppose in the back of my mind is, "Would this have been more or less possible in the wet darkroom?" When I think of the hours I spent in the dark, breathing chemicals, just for a single image...

That said, I don't think, vievetrick, that you're being lazy. I'd rather like to have the option of jpg+raw, because quite often I actually do get it right, and don't need to fool about pping, and it'd be easier to have the jpeg right there. Congratulations on doing a good enough job to not need to pp!

Julie

AVANT · 10-31-2007, 04:50 PM

My camera takes acceptable JPGs, however, I always feel like I can always make it just a little bit better, so I still shoot everything in RAW. If it's something that doesn't deserve the extra attention, I run a batch automation to convert them to raw with very typical settings.

10-20-2007, 07:49 PM	#1
vievetrick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Easthampton - Massachusetts - USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,183	I think I am getting Lazy ? So about a month or so ago I switched the K10 to shot Jpg+Raw. I can't remeber why but I have not switched back since. I switched to shooting just RAW about a year or more ago and thought I would never go back to shooting just jpg. Now the lazy part, or maybe not. I really have noticed that I am liking the not having to convert the Raw to Jpg. Actually a big percentage of shots I am very happy with both exposure and sharpness in the jpg's. There are still a few I have to tinker with and convert but overall my time on the pc has been improved a bunch. Not sure what I am trying to say but anyone that has issue with the jpg's out of the k10 has I guess a higher standard then me. I am happy I have the back up of the raw file but I think for a while I will stick with this. Anyone else find themselves going back to jpeg after going to RAW.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
People Lazy Saturday	stash	Post Your Photos!	5	07-07-2010 07:30 AM
People my lazy dog	hoshinokoe	Post Your Photos!	2	12-19-2009 01:25 PM
You Lazy Sloth!	Timtast1c	Post Your Photos!	11	04-30-2009 09:19 AM
Lazy Kitten	SCguy	Post Your Photos!	8	03-10-2009 06:11 PM
Lazy Sail	Sailor	Post Your Photos!	6	07-10-2007 03:50 PM

10-20-2007, 08:05 PM	#2
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Maybe a little different take on this. I won't get into the Jpeg vs RAW thing again because it's been beaten to death and frankly Jpegs are just fine the vast majority of the time. If you're shooting for poster size and selling your work to a magazine well then maybe. Now as for the Lazy question. I found myself doing the same for awhile. Thinking oh well I can fix the exposure and crop it differently at home. Then I noticed the quality of the shots diminishing. Stopped using the tripod and depending on SR too much and lots of other things. So back to basics. Following the rules of thumb. Take more time to compose and expose the shot better. I still love Tav and Hyper program but for me shooting manually and manual AF when I can as well has vastly improved the end result. In other words go back to how I shot with the K1000. All manual, no SR, can't change ASA (ISO) too much without changing rolls. Compose more carefully because each shot cost money. now I'm back to trying to think old school and the shots show. Digitals can make you lazy very easily and this thread is a great reminder to not move too far from the old school rules that have served photogs well over the decades. It's nice to open the file on the card and not have to spend 20++ minutes to fix each shot. Also more satisfying to think "I took that shot, not the computer"

10-20-2007, 08:27 PM	#3
Mr Hyde Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: NJ, USA Posts: 760	Originally posted by vievetrick ..... Actually a big percentage of shots I am very happy with both exposure and sharpness in the jpg's. There are still a few I have to tinker with and convert but overall my time on the pc has been improved a bunch. Not sure what I am trying to say but anyone that has issue with the jpg's out of the k10 has I guess a higher standard then me....... I had my portrait stuff set up to take shots of my kids for their homecoming dance. Since it was up anyway I decided to take some shots of some of my guitars. I shot them raw+jpg just to compare. Maybe it was the lens but even at 100% crop I really didnt see much of a difference between the two. I do have the K10D set for +2 Sharpness and +1 contrast so maybe that's why.

10-20-2007, 08:37 PM	#4
ddhytz Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 602	Originally posted by Mr Hyde ... I really didnt see much of a difference between the two. I do have the K10D set for +2 Sharpness and +1 contrast so maybe that's why. How about change to default and compare again?

10-20-2007, 10:13 PM	#5
Mr Hyde Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: NJ, USA Posts: 760	Originally posted by ddhytz How about change to default and compare again? Those comparisons have been done over and over again and I'm sure my results will mirror those already obtained by everyone else. There are som einstances where RAW is a better option for me but for the most part JPG suits most of my needs. when in doubt I'll push the raw button.

10-21-2007, 06:55 AM	#6
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	I've taken many JPEG's and been VERY satisfied with the results. Set to Bright Mode of course... However, I it's easier for me to shoot RAW, in case an image is submitted for print (doing some articles - hopefully). They want a min. of 240 dpi, preferably 360 dpi, because of the print process. They normally print 300 dpi, but prefer to be able to downsize, instead of upsize. In photoshop, min. 8.3 inches on the long side, 10 is better, so you cannot crop a lot! You should see their scanned film/slide requirements...

10-21-2007, 08:54 AM	#7
vievetrick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Easthampton - Massachusetts - USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,183 Original Poster	Not at all trying to stir the RAW Vs. JPG thing more like just thinking out loud. I am sticking with I am getting Lazy and happy with what I got and know I have a back up to work with.

10-21-2007, 01:27 PM	#8
Photo Tramp Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Lancaster, PA. Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,041	Hi Pat, Could it be that in switching your process you have found more time for the enjoyment of the hobby? But then again with no processing and more time to enjoy, If your wife find's out she may have you doing more around the house. Be careful my friend don't let her know your not busy.

10-21-2007, 05:39 PM	#9
vievetrick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Easthampton - Massachusetts - USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,183 Original Poster	lololol good point Dave

10-31-2007, 02:13 PM	#10
JahJahwarrior Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Gainesville, Fl Posts: 102	When I shoot in raw, I almost never bother to make .jpgs or do anything with them. I have tonnes of raw shots I've never even looked at.... So, I shoot in raw when it's important, and .jpg when I'm just taking pictures.

10-31-2007, 04:35 PM	#11
foxglove Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Atlantic Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,049	Originally posted by Peter Zack It's nice to open the file on the card and not have to spend 20++ minutes to fix each shot. Also more satisfying to think "I took that shot, not the computer" Good point! With the K100 I don't have the option of jpg+raw, and I like the option of rescuing my screw-ups and/or printing large (not that I have done much, but I could... ) so I shoot raw. The images I'm happiest with are the ones that I can zip through camera raw in under 30 seconds, just tweak a few settings, maybe a little crop if needed, then into photoshop just to resize and sharpen. Then I know I got everything I could reasonably correct in the camera, and I feel, as you say, that I took the picture, not the computer. That said, I do enjoy mucking around with an image sometimes, but usually because I think it's a good image in the first place, not a complete rescue job. I suppose in the back of my mind is, "Would this have been more or less possible in the wet darkroom?" When I think of the hours I spent in the dark, breathing chemicals, just for a single image... That said, I don't think, vievetrick, that you're being lazy. I'd rather like to have the option of jpg+raw, because quite often I actually do get it right, and don't need to fool about pping, and it'd be easier to have the jpeg right there. Congratulations on doing a good enough job to not need to pp! Julie

10-31-2007, 04:50 PM	#12
AVANT Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: California Posts: 426	My camera takes acceptable JPGs, however, I always feel like I can always make it just a little bit better, so I still shoot everything in RAW. If it's something that doesn't deserve the extra attention, I run a batch automation to convert them to raw with very typical settings.