RAW vs exposure bracketing

shuttervox · 02-18-2009, 03:17 PM

Considering how much exposure latitude you can get out of a single RAW file,
do you still need to bracket some shots?

For example, when shooting a landscape scene... you want detail in both the land
and the sky, and you don't have a gradient filter. (Do any of you ever even USE a
gradient filter?) Is there enough detail in one middle-of-the-road RAW file, or is
bracketing still required?

What about for subtle HDR shots?

[kurt]

flyer · 02-18-2009, 04:15 PM

Even if you can pull out more details in a RAW file (compared to JPEG), you can (and will) find a lot of situation were the sensor won't be able to get the whole dynamic range of a scene, so bracketing will be your best option. If the horizon is fairly straight with no tall trees or buildings going through the sky, then a graduated ND filter might/will do the job.

Jodokast96 · 02-18-2009, 05:43 PM

It depends on how dramatic a difference you are looking for. You won't get necessarily get enough for an extreme looking HDR, but for a fairly normal look, you can pull quite a bit out of the shadows with a single shot and nothing more than several layers of Curves adjustments.

**Canada_Rockies** · 02-18-2009, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by shuttervox

Considering how much exposure latitude you can get out of a single RAW file,
do you still need to bracket some shots?

For example, when shooting a landscape scene... you want detail in both the land
and the sky, and you don't have a gradient filter. (Do any of you ever even USE a
gradient filter?) Is there enough detail in one middle-of-the-road RAW file, or is
bracketing still required?

What about for subtle HDR shots?

When in doubt, bracket. Even if you only use 2 of the brackets to create your HDR assembly, you can often emulate a gradient filter with the two shots. It doesn't cost anything to use the brackets. I do it regularly, even though more often than not I use only one of the exposures.

[kurt][/quote]

arbutusq · 02-19-2009, 07:07 AM

RAW can't create miracles. As was noted above there will be more noise in the shadows and depending on the scene there may be too much.

I still use Grad ND filters in a Cokin setup as I am often travelling light and a tripod for multiple exposures isn't practical.

julianactive · 02-19-2009, 08:44 AM

I don't see why shooting RAW has anything to do with bracketing. RAW can't do miracles with underexposed or overexposed shots. If that was the case then why even bother with exposure?
I shoot mostly manual and RAW plus JPEG. I have found very little difference with the end product for what I shoot, so I have been thinking of doing away with my RAW setting for most of my shots. To me RAW seems to be of the greatest value for changing white balance. Now when I shoot indoors I think RAW is the way to go.

mithrandir · 02-19-2009, 08:53 AM

With Landscapes taken at 100 ISO, I have found that you can pull better than 11 stops out of a single RAW shot with fairly good results and without noise being too much of a factor. Often this is all you have on a windy day.

**Canada_Rockies** · 02-19-2009, 10:25 AM

RAW has about one stop of latitude on each end of the exposure range compared to JPEG. I see no reason to ever use JPEG.

EricT · 02-19-2009, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by julianactive

I don't see why shooting RAW has anything to do with bracketing. RAW can't do miracles with underexposed or overexposed shots. If that was the case then why even bother with exposure?
I shoot mostly manual and RAW plus JPEG. I have found very little difference with the end product for what I shoot, so I have been thinking of doing away with my RAW setting for most of my shots. To me RAW seems to be of the greatest value for changing white balance. Now when I shoot indoors I think RAW is the way to go.

You can use one RAW file to generate several exposures, and then blend these together to increase the dynamic range, i.e. post-process bracketing. This is very useful if you for instance don't have a tripod with you.

A RAW shot can also let you recover some highlights that would be lost in a JPEG file, or let you bring out some detail from the shadows with less noise than you could with a JPEG file. So actually a RAW file can do miracles in some cases, it has saved my shots many times.

SteveM · 02-19-2009, 12:21 PM

You need to bring the shot into the dynamic range of the sensor. You can bracket but ND filters use is on the rise again with a new larger size available, and with a firmer edge rather than it being totally graduated. Why you ask?.....It's easier to hold the filter in front of the lens for the shot than muck with later. I still bracket at times, but not very often. Sing-ray has the largest line available.

shadowulf · 02-19-2009, 12:39 PM

I guess I'm the only one who shoots bracketed using RAW. Because sometimes i even mess that up!

kurt · 02-19-2009, 01:53 PM

RAW is great and I only shoot RAW's, but still if conditions are hard and/or it is 'the moment' I will bracket to make sure that there is one decent shot which can survive ...

**Canada_Rockies** · 02-19-2009, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by shadowulf

I guess I'm the only one who shoots bracketed using RAW. Because sometimes i even mess that up!

I also bracket RAW exposures when in doubt as to the dynamic range of the image.

shadowulf · 02-19-2009, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by Canada_Rockies

I also bracket RAW exposures when in doubt as to the dynamic range of the image.

Whew, that is good to hear. I have done the same. I've also inadvertently set my exposure bracket too narrow/wide for the scene, then used some RAW adjustments to bring things back in line.

**Lowell Goudge** · 02-19-2009, 05:58 PM

I think there is a bit of confusion on the part of the OP as to the intent of either.

Bracketing has 2 uses, one where you are looking for very minor changes in exposure and the "perfect shot" These are usually over a complete range of 1 stop, and RAW can probably be used to do the same.

The other use of bracketing is because the dynamic range of the shot is high, and there are several options probably many stops apart and the shooter is not sure which he wants. here RAW is useless. you braceket to decide which you want.

02-18-2009, 03:17 PM	#1
shuttervox Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Canandaigua NY Posts: 74	RAW vs exposure bracketing Considering how much exposure latitude you can get out of a single RAW file, do you still need to bracket some shots? For example, when shooting a landscape scene... you want detail in both the land and the sky, and you don't have a gradient filter. (Do any of you ever even USE a gradient filter?) Is there enough detail in one middle-of-the-road RAW file, or is bracketing still required? What about for subtle HDR shots? [kurt]

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Exposure Bracketing	iman1981	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	8	05-24-2010 01:21 AM
K-x Remote+Exposure Bracketing?	FattyMcJ	Pentax DSLR Discussion	1	03-16-2010 04:03 PM
Exposure Bracketing on the K-x	noahpurdy	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	7	12-26-2009 10:28 PM
Exposure Bracketing Question	joodiespost	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	2	12-22-2009 09:49 PM
K10D- Exposure Bracketing - Isn't that a sure way to get it right?	ebooks4pentax	Pentax DSLR Discussion	20	05-23-2007 02:53 PM

02-18-2009, 04:15 PM	#2
flyer Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ste-Anne des Plaines, Qc., Canada Posts: 2,013	Even if you can pull out more details in a RAW file (compared to JPEG), you can (and will) find a lot of situation were the sensor won't be able to get the whole dynamic range of a scene, so bracketing will be your best option. If the horizon is fairly straight with no tall trees or buildings going through the sky, then a graduated ND filter might/will do the job.

02-18-2009, 05:43 PM	#3
Jodokast96 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Erial, NJ USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,134	It depends on how dramatic a difference you are looking for. You won't get necessarily get enough for an extreme looking HDR, but for a fairly normal look, you can pull quite a bit out of the shadows with a single shot and nothing more than several layers of Curves adjustments.

02-18-2009, 09:18 PM	#4
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by shuttervox Considering how much exposure latitude you can get out of a single RAW file, do you still need to bracket some shots? For example, when shooting a landscape scene... you want detail in both the land and the sky, and you don't have a gradient filter. (Do any of you ever even USE a gradient filter?) Is there enough detail in one middle-of-the-road RAW file, or is bracketing still required? What about for subtle HDR shots? When in doubt, bracket. Even if you only use 2 of the brackets to create your HDR assembly, you can often emulate a gradient filter with the two shots. It doesn't cost anything to use the brackets. I do it regularly, even though more often than not I use only one of the exposures. [kurt][/quote]

02-19-2009, 07:07 AM	#5
arbutusq Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Vancouver BC canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 380	RAW can't create miracles. As was noted above there will be more noise in the shadows and depending on the scene there may be too much. I still use Grad ND filters in a Cokin setup as I am often travelling light and a tripod for multiple exposures isn't practical.

02-19-2009, 08:44 AM	#6
julianactive Guest	I don't see why shooting RAW has anything to do with bracketing. RAW can't do miracles with underexposed or overexposed shots. If that was the case then why even bother with exposure? I shoot mostly manual and RAW plus JPEG. I have found very little difference with the end product for what I shoot, so I have been thinking of doing away with my RAW setting for most of my shots. To me RAW seems to be of the greatest value for changing white balance. Now when I shoot indoors I think RAW is the way to go.

02-19-2009, 08:53 AM	#7
mithrandir Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,895	With Landscapes taken at 100 ISO, I have found that you can pull better than 11 stops out of a single RAW shot with fairly good results and without noise being too much of a factor. Often this is all you have on a windy day.

02-19-2009, 10:25 AM	#8
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	RAW has about one stop of latitude on each end of the exposure range compared to JPEG. I see no reason to ever use JPEG.

02-19-2009, 11:56 AM	#9
EricT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 484	Originally posted by julianactive I don't see why shooting RAW has anything to do with bracketing. RAW can't do miracles with underexposed or overexposed shots. If that was the case then why even bother with exposure? I shoot mostly manual and RAW plus JPEG. I have found very little difference with the end product for what I shoot, so I have been thinking of doing away with my RAW setting for most of my shots. To me RAW seems to be of the greatest value for changing white balance. Now when I shoot indoors I think RAW is the way to go. You can use one RAW file to generate several exposures, and then blend these together to increase the dynamic range, i.e. post-process bracketing. This is very useful if you for instance don't have a tripod with you. A RAW shot can also let you recover some highlights that would be lost in a JPEG file, or let you bring out some detail from the shadows with less noise than you could with a JPEG file. So actually a RAW file can do miracles in some cases, it has saved my shots many times.

02-19-2009, 12:21 PM	#10
SteveM Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,294	You need to bring the shot into the dynamic range of the sensor. You can bracket but ND filters use is on the rise again with a new larger size available, and with a firmer edge rather than it being totally graduated. Why you ask?.....It's easier to hold the filter in front of the lens for the shot than muck with later. I still bracket at times, but not very often. Sing-ray has the largest line available.

02-19-2009, 12:39 PM	#11
shadowulf Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Western United States Posts: 48	I guess I'm the only one who shoots bracketed using RAW. Because sometimes i even mess that up!

02-19-2009, 01:53 PM	#12
kurt Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Hyvinkää, Suomi (Finland) Photos: Gallery Posts: 669	RAW is great and I only shoot RAW's, but still if conditions are hard and/or it is 'the moment' I will bracket to make sure that there is one decent shot which can survive ...

02-19-2009, 02:12 PM	#13
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by shadowulf I guess I'm the only one who shoots bracketed using RAW. Because sometimes i even mess that up! I also bracket RAW exposures when in doubt as to the dynamic range of the image.

02-19-2009, 03:09 PM	#14
shadowulf Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Western United States Posts: 48	Originally posted by Canada_Rockies I also bracket RAW exposures when in doubt as to the dynamic range of the image. Whew, that is good to hear. I have done the same. I've also inadvertently set my exposure bracket too narrow/wide for the scene, then used some RAW adjustments to bring things back in line.

02-19-2009, 05:58 PM	#15
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	I think there is a bit of confusion on the part of the OP as to the intent of either. Bracketing has 2 uses, one where you are looking for very minor changes in exposure and the "perfect shot" These are usually over a complete range of 1 stop, and RAW can probably be used to do the same. The other use of bracketing is because the dynamic range of the shot is high, and there are several options probably many stops apart and the shooter is not sure which he wants. here RAW is useless. you braceket to decide which you want.