Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 19, 2012, 4:14 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
MartinSykes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Cheshire, UK
Posts: 854
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grounded View Post
After reading all your comments I would point out that in the days of film the ultimate was achieved with large format cameras and fine grain slide film, then 35 mm claimed to have achieved parity, along comes digital, mediocre at first, but improving all the time, a few years ago with 6 mp it was as good as the best slide film, or so it was claimed. Now we have all those pixels to play with and still some people say there is room for improvement, Let's get this right , if your jpeg is correctly exposed with the right white balance, and all other settings are satisfactory, how can it be improved, or do you say it should be air brushed? I don't believe in cheating except for cloning out an imperfection in a persons face, A photograph is a record, H R D , replacing a bland sky with fluffy white clouds is to my mind just not on. I like to think there are lots of shooters out there who agree with me.
That's another argument we've had before as well though - it depends on what you're trying to do - record a memory or use the camera to capture the raw materials for something more artistic. Neither is wrong but you shouldn't say that the artistic route is wrong just because that's not what you're trying to do.
__________________
AutoHDR - Free HDR software for Windows at http://www.autohdr.co.uk on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=...36045126467361
My Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/martinsykes
Panasonic DMC-FZ38, Sony ­α580
MartinSykes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2012, 10:00 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

My two cents as an amateur - I use Lightroom to manage my photos so it makes absolutely no difference to my work flow whether I shoot raw or jpg (Aperture works the same way from what I saw during the 30 day trial). The program treats both files the same, so I can see very few reasons to NOT shoot raw (there are situations where it's better to shoot jpg). I like having the bit of extra dynamic range/detail and better ability to correct things if I mess up the settings, so I almost always shoot raw only.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2012, 2:07 AM   #23
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Agreed, if you are using LR or similar and never need to do a fast delivery there is zero downside to using RAW.
__________________
My gallery
My X100 blog
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2012, 2:23 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
wave01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,748
Default

Every one to there own really I shoot RAW its the same as having a film negative all the data is there and I can use it the way i want to. a Jpeg is some one or program or cameras interpretation of that that picture. to me the upside is if something was wrong then you have a chance in RAW to recover the picture
wave01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2012, 6:13 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peripatetic View Post
Agreed, if you are using LR or similar and never need to do a fast delivery there is zero downside to using RAW.
... except for the whole "File Size" and "Speed" thing.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2012, 6:22 AM   #26
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
... except for the whole "File Size" and "Speed" thing.
Quite right. Almost zero downside.

I think I'll change my sig.
__________________
My gallery
My X100 blog
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2012, 7:43 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
iowa_jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Central Iowa
Posts: 589
Default

It sure helps to have someone stir the kettle once in awhile. Makes for interesting conversation, though I wonder why we (humans) must turn the smallest of things into an issue.

For myself, RAW is the way to go most of the time. When shooting fire service events I switch over to compressed images to keep the editing to a minimum,as I might shoot a couple thousand shots in a weekend. For the rest, RAW is my preference because it is more forgiving of operator error.
iowa_jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2012, 8:07 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Calicajun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Quartz Hill, CA
Posts: 3,455
Default

I like shooting RAW because for me it faster than Jpeg when processing. Using LR3 to download, resize, crop, correct WB, color tint, exposure and lens correction is faster than trying to do the same with a jpeg file. Then the RAW's are converted to jpeg/tiff and that were all the artiste stuff is done if there one or two that really stand out to me. Use to shoot everything in jpeg until the wife read Steve's forum (thanks Steve) on the advantages of shooting RAW. To keep peace in the house (stop her nagging me) I tried RAW and found out it works at least for me much better than jpegs.
__________________
Comments always welcome.
Calicajun is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:32 PM.