Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-29-2009, 12:48 PM   #31
Loyal Site Supporter
dcmsox2004's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: rhode island
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,331
QuoteOriginally posted by Ed n Georgia Quote
I shoot RAW+jpg.

If I happen to get it right the first time, I use the jpeg. If I don't get it right, I have the RAW file with which to make the necessary corrections.

When I shoot a really crappy shot, I keep neither the jpeg nor raw file.
nice option to consider..... really can't go wrong.... like your darwin approach to stupid folks... maybe they should just be forced to have a stamp on their forehead...

12-29-2009, 12:51 PM   #32
New Member
bazzie's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, England
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 24
QuoteOriginally posted by Ed n Georgia Quote
I shoot RAW+jpg.

If I happen to get it right the first time, I use the jpeg. If I don't get it right, I have the RAW file with which to make the necessary corrections.

When I shoot a really crappy shot, I keep neither the jpeg nor raw file.
This is the most sensible comment so far. And not just because I do the same!
12-29-2009, 01:11 PM   #33
Igilligan
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by Ed n Georgia Quote
I shoot RAW+jpg.

If I happen to get it right the first time, I use the jpeg. If I don't get it right, I have the RAW file with which to make the necessary corrections.

When I shoot a really crappy shot, I keep neither the jpeg nor raw file.
QuoteOriginally posted by bazzie Quote
This is the most sensible comment so far. And not just because I do the same!

Actually we should all be saving every Raw file, even if we think they are really "crappy" now. Eventually there will be a 'Super Raw' that will automatically fix even crappy shots and make them great photos. I am a little surprised we did not see "Super Raw" on the Lavender K-x...

Maybe we will see it next year on the Fushia K-x Super...
12-29-2009, 01:41 PM   #34
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,185
QuoteOriginally posted by Igilligan Quote
Actually we should all be saving every Raw file, even if we think they are really "crappy" now. Eventually there will be a 'Super Raw' that will automatically fix even crappy shots and make them great photos. I am a little surprised we did not see "Super Raw" on the Lavender K-x...

Maybe we will see it next year on the Fushia K-x Super...
Someone's been hitting the sauce again ...

Seriously, I was on a campaign bus in October and the web team wanted some of my photos to send to some pubs. Out of habit I shot RAW and it was a workflow PITA to review, edit, and export the RAW photos on my HP netbook with 10" screen. I learned my lesson, when time is of the essence, shoot JPEG. I'd even consider shooting 10Mp instead of 14.2 if it would speed things up...

12-29-2009, 02:25 PM   #35
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
I'm primarily a jpeg shooter. All my bodies are set up to default to jpeg, with the RAW button set to give me RAW+ for the few situations when I want it. Whenever I get a new body, I take the time to set up the image parameters to most closely match what I see, then go out and get used to how the body meters so I can expose correctly. This takes some time, but overall, it saves me tons of media write and post processing time and storage space over the lifetime of the camera. Once set up properly, I can then use the performance features of the camera to their maximum, which is never true with RAW output.

I don't think that there is any question that optimal processing of RAW can maximize the potential of any shot, but the differences between a well exposed jpeg and RAW are pretty small in my experience, and have absolutely no bearing on my usual output which is prints, usually 8x10s.

The most commonly referred-to knock on "the jpeg engine" is from professional reviewers, but they only test at default settings, so they are judging the output very much from a basis of their own personal taste vs decisions made by the camera's engineers, not from any standard of quality, if such a thing might actually exist. It's been easily illustrated that most of the objections to the jpeg output in reviews for any particular camera can be negated by tweaking the settings.

It's interesting to note that the most sophisticated and advanced DSLRs have the widest range of user-selectable image parameter settings -- all irrelevant to RAW shooting unless you use a RAW processor that can read and use these settings, and process the RAW file accordingly -- which gives you the same output as a jpeg straight out of the camera. . .

In the past, I spent a lot of money and time trying to find the "best" RAW processor, then trying to learn how to use the software to best effect and efficiency. . . only to buy a new body -- wait for the software houses to implement the new RAW format -- then redo all the comparison tests between RAW converters to find the best one for the new cam. BTDT, and only got marginally better output, if that. Now, I just tweak the jpeg image parameters and go out and shoot. . . and save myself the angst, time, and memory space.

I no longer worry about the small percentages of differences in IQ between different mfgs and models and formats. I'll leave that to the professional reviewers and those others who obsess about IQ at over 100%. . .

Of course, YMMV -- do whatever you need to make you happy.

Scott
12-29-2009, 05:19 PM   #36
Site Supporter
Ex Finn.'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Southern Maryland.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,292
Jpegs`s look very nice out of K100D in default mode, even the tungsten shots, kinda like the warm look. Only time I really used RAW and hoped for pp salvation, was under high pressure sodium lighting. That did not come out as hoped for, needles to say.

Cheers, Mike.
12-29-2009, 05:36 PM   #37
Senior Member
Mark Castleman's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Westminster, Colorado
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 298
<Yoda Voice>
Begun again the format wars have
</Yoda Voice>

I swear this is like bringing up oil or tires on a motorcycle forum.

Personally I think if you ask people who only shoot RAW (I'm one of them) a majority of them use either Aperture, Lightroom or Bridge for getting their images on the computer. Since for these programs all images are handled the same way as far as the user is concerned they do not see using RAW as extra work. I'm quite happy with how my images come out and I don't feel that I spend extra time on them. Now keywording, that's another matter...
12-29-2009, 05:41 PM   #38
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by snostorm Quote
I'm primarily a jpeg shooter. All my bodies are set up to default to jpeg, with the RAW button set to give me RAW+ for the few situations when I want it. Whenever I get a new body, I take the time to set up the image parameters to most closely match what I see, then go out and get used to how the body meters so I can expose correctly. This takes some time, but overall, it saves me tons of media write and post processing time and storage space over the lifetime of the camera. Once set up properly, I can then use the performance features of the camera to their maximum, which is never true with RAW output.

I don't think that there is any question that optimal processing of RAW can maximize the potential of any shot, but the differences between a well exposed jpeg and RAW are pretty small in my experience, and have absolutely no bearing on my usual output which is prints, usually 8x10s.

The most commonly referred-to knock on "the jpeg engine" is from professional reviewers, but they only test at default settings, so they are judging the output very much from a basis of their own personal taste vs decisions made by the camera's engineers, not from any standard of quality, if such a thing might actually exist. It's been easily illustrated that most of the objections to the jpeg output in reviews for any particular camera can be negated by tweaking the settings.

It's interesting to note that the most sophisticated and advanced DSLRs have the widest range of user-selectable image parameter settings -- all irrelevant to RAW shooting unless you use a RAW processor that can read and use these settings, and process the RAW file accordingly -- which gives you the same output as a jpeg straight out of the camera. . .

In the past, I spent a lot of money and time trying to find the "best" RAW processor, then trying to learn how to use the software to best effect and efficiency. . . only to buy a new body -- wait for the software houses to implement the new RAW format -- then redo all the comparison tests between RAW converters to find the best one for the new cam. BTDT, and only got marginally better output, if that. Now, I just tweak the jpeg image parameters and go out and shoot. . . and save myself the angst, time, and memory space.

I no longer worry about the small percentages of differences in IQ between different mfgs and models and formats. I'll leave that to the professional reviewers and those others who obsess about IQ at over 100%. . .

Of course, YMMV -- do whatever you need to make you happy.

Scott
How true, great write up

12-29-2009, 05:44 PM   #39
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by Alfisti Quote
There's the misconception, it's not just about 'settings' it's essentially if you ever so much as tweak a single image.
no actually, by settings i also include exposure and color balance, I think it is you that missed the point, the biggest proponents of RAW all talk about saving shots, I prefer to do that in advance.

A bad shot, regardless of format will always be a bad shot. most of the minor tweaks are just as good in 8 bit as 12 bit, it's the major ones that need better resolution and those are the ones that you should avoid by getting right in the first place
12-29-2009, 05:59 PM   #40
Pentaxian
Oldschool's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 1,276
Another jpeg shooter here.
Do I want to take better photos? Yes.
Will shooting raw make me a better photographer? Probably not.
12-29-2009, 06:21 PM   #41
Veteran Member
GoremanX's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Georgia, VT
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,653
QuoteOriginally posted by Ed n Georgia Quote
I shoot RAW+jpg.

If I happen to get it right the first time, I use the jpeg. If I don't get it right, I have the RAW file with which to make the necessary corrections.

When I shoot a really crappy shot, I keep neither the jpeg nor raw file.
I agree wholeheartedly, and that's what I do too.

Another thing I noticed: when reviewing pictures on the camera, if all I saved was a RAW file, what I'm actually viewing on the screen is the JPEG snapshot that's embedded in the RAW file. When I zoom in a lot, the details look atrocious and the JPEG squares are clearly visible, so I can't spot the details properly (because the JPEG snapshot in the RAW file is horribly compressed). But when I'm reviewing a JPEG or RAW+JPEG file, I get a lot more detail when reviewing the pictures at high magnification on the camera because I'm viewing the high-quality JPEG file itself, not some horrible embedded snapshot.

It's worth pointing out that the size difference between max-quality JPEG and RAW is tiny on the K7, even when using DNG. But using RAW+JPEG obviously uses up twice as much room as either one alone.
12-29-2009, 06:40 PM   #42
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California
Posts: 851
This argument is always fun to watch. And I completely agree with those who have posted their complaints here that there are an aweful lot of posts and no pictures.

Here's my take (and pictures to back it up). Sometimes RAW is perfect and sometimes JPG is perfect. And the more experience you have shooting both the more you will recognize the appropriate situation for each.

JPG
I do a lot of event photography where I will take the same picture over and over and over and over and over again. Its easy to get the exposure dialed and figure out the appropriate jpg settings so why bother with RAW. I can post these pictures up to smugmug straight from the memory card


RAW
Tough light for exposure and WB spell the perfect situation for RAW. I appologize for posting this photo in two parts of the forum on the same day (wow that means I made 2 posts here today...). This was one of those random guess shots for exposure. It was a 3 second exposure and I was holding the flash in my hand and manually pressing the button near the end of the 3 seconds. I tested this shot with a gray card and the camera had been set to AWB and guessed a temp of ~4000 but the actually temp was 2400. All of the adjustments to this photo were much easier and more accurate when starting with RAW
12-29-2009, 06:59 PM   #43
Igilligan
Guest




Well done... That is a beautiful photo

That is a great shot, and amazing that you even conceived of how to get that IMHO. You obviously have a lot of 'real' experience to "guess" this shot would work.

Wow, In really looking at that shot, it is about as tough a shot as you can attempt... And a beautiful example of where RAW is the ticket.

So lets note that.

If you are at a low light event, with 100's of little decorative lights of different colors, and you want to shoot a 3 sec exp in order to capture the beautifully lit area as it appears, but use a handheld / hand triggered flash at the end of the exposure to pop your subject... You should be shooting RAW!


Ps the bike shot is really good too... did you flash that to beat the shadows?
12-29-2009, 08:25 PM   #44
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California
Posts: 851
QuoteOriginally posted by Igilligan Quote
That is a great shot, and amazing that you even conceived of how to get that IMHO. You obviously have a lot of 'real' experience to "guess" this shot would work.

Wow, In really looking at that shot, it is about as tough a shot as you can attempt... And a beautiful example of where RAW is the ticket.

So lets note that.

If you are at a low light event, with 100's of little decorative lights of different colors, and you want to shoot a 3 sec exp in order to capture the beautifully lit area as it appears, but use a handheld / hand triggered flash at the end of the exposure to pop your subject... You should be shooting RAW!


Ps the bike shot is really good too... did you flash that to beat the shadows?
Thanks.
The bike shot was with a pocket wizard and remote flash. I used my Canon 1DmkIII for that shot because I can get a sync speed of 1/320.

The night shot is with K-7 and 43mm ltd and a hand-held Canon 580 exII flash.
12-29-2009, 08:43 PM   #45
Pentaxian
jgredline's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: LosAngeles, Ca.
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,587
Another Jpeg shooter here. :)

I shoot 99.9 % Jpegs. To say 100% would be a lie as I have experimented some time back RAW...In the end, I could not tell a difference, likely because my PP skills are very basic and would rather not waste my time learning it....Why waste my time doing PP work when I could use that time to shoot...Of course if I was a pro, then that is different, but I am far being a pro....

I have to say that I agree with that Damn Brit..Lots of arm chair photographers....

Lastly, I got to say...How happy I am to read that I am not alone...Many RAW only shooters have told me and have made me feel like an idiot for not shooting RAW. Now I am happy to know that I am not the only idiot here
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, dslr, photography
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
The K-7 makes me want to shoot JPEG aerodave Pentax DSLR Discussion 66 11-14-2009 03:10 PM
Winners: Point & Shoot Contest #23 - "People" and Pentax Compact Cameras 2 09-26-2009 09:33 AM
Point & Shoot Contest #23 - "People" and Pentax Compact Cameras 22 09-26-2009 05:19 AM
Finding people to shoot xecutech Photographic Technique 171 03-11-2009 06:54 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:34 PM. | 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