Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 14, 2010, 9:29 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 51
Default RAW or JPEG or both?

When you folks are shooting, do you choose one format over the other, or do you take both JPEG and RAW at the same time? I have never dealt with RAW, but after seeing what adjustments can be made in a photo, I am thinking about doing double format photos.

Just curious what others think.

Greg
YukonJack is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 14, 2010, 9:45 PM   #2
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

unless i am shooting something high volume like sports, etc.

i shoot everything in raw.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2010, 1:24 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Ancientritual's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Columbia, IL
Posts: 347
Default

I shoot RAW + JPEG. Then I process the JPEG's. I will study the JPEG shots and then make adjustments in RAW. The RAW images are then converted to TIFF...
Ancientritual is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2010, 1:54 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brisbane. Queensland, Australia
Posts: 669
Default

Hi Greg

I'm the opposite to the 2 gentlemen above..I shoot 90% in JPEG, and only use JPEG+RAW if I'm fairly certain that the subject or conditions warrant the extra PP to add value or IQ to the shot. (bear in mind that's partly because my PP skill is moderate at best)

For most casual (non-pro) purposes, PPing a JPEG can get similar results to a RAW, especially from the tiny sensors in the FZ and most P&S cameras. It ultimately comes down to what you enjoy doing most - taking more photos with your time, making adjustments in-camera to get the results you want, or taking less photos and spending more time on the PC doing PP and converting RAW files.

Consider also that the Venus processor in Panasonic cameras, does some built-in on-the-fly PP to its own RAW data when creating JPEGS on your SD card - ie. it removes chromatic aberrations (purple fringing), and corrects for lens aberrations (pincushion and barrel). If you use Adobe producst you then have to correct for these manually.

I'm not sure if Photofun Studio recognises the files from their metadata (EXIF) and provides a correction tool - I'm yet to test that.

Here's a (controversial admittedly) link that further extols the primary usage of JPEG's:
N.B some of the author's views make a lot of sense, others are a bit "extreme"

JPG vs Raw: Get it Right the First Time
chillgreg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2010, 2:32 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Africa
Posts: 232
Default Jpg

I only shoot JPG: I hold the view that whilst in the early years of Digital photography
the built-in JPG engines in cameras were basic, this for quite some time already no
longer holds true. In fact the JPG engines in today’s cameras are capable of excellent
output.
At the end of the day it will depend of what you what to get out of photography, I
want to spent 100% of my time enjoying and focusing (excuse the pun) on the actual
moment. I give a lot of thought to the technical aspects whilst shooting…. But once
done, I don’t want to spend too much time and effort on post processing: Each to
their own I suppose
dbnnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 16, 2010, 5:22 AM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 87
Default

I always get superior results from PPing RAW. It takes a little time to create good profiles (a.k.a. tastes in SilkyPix) for lots of different situations, but once done I find I can load up said profile and don't need to tweak it much, if at all, for later images of a similar scenario.

JPEG is pretty good in my FZ28, but if I'm trying to appease pixel peepers or make ready for large prints, RAW is the way to go.
Lazy Lens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 16, 2010, 5:50 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Africa
Posts: 232
Default

For those who use Irfan View:
The latest version of Iview now supports FZ38/35 Raw files.
dbnnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2010, 1:04 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Ancientritual's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Columbia, IL
Posts: 347
Default

Although JPEG output is improving, the white balance in cameras can still be mistake prone. Raw allows you to make corrections to the white balance with more accuracy then trying to correct a JPEG. Remember that JPEG has compression issues and variance can occur, depending on the camera maker...
Ancientritual is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2010, 1:48 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brisbane. Queensland, Australia
Posts: 669
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancientritual View Post
Although JPEG output is improving, the white balance in cameras can still be mistake prone. Raw allows you to make corrections to the white balance with more accuracy then trying to correct a JPEG. Remember that JPEG has compression issues and variance can occur, depending on the camera maker...
I'm not gonna argue, you're avatar is way too scary
chillgreg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2010, 3:34 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 87
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancientritual View Post
Although JPEG output is improving, the white balance in cameras can still be mistake prone. Raw allows you to make corrections to the white balance with more accuracy then trying to correct a JPEG.
Exactly. Some months back, I took a number of indoor shots of ornate bouquets with my FZ28, both with flash and various ambient schemes and using various in-camera settings. The wb was off on all of them, resulting in several inaccurate hues, with magentas being the strongest affected. I could somewhat correct for it in the Jpegs, but was ultimately left disappointed. I tweaked the RAW versions until they matched very closely with what my own eyes were seeing.

I'll take the opportunity to remind folks that it also helps to keep one's monitor calibrated. The one I use for photos/vids is an NEC FP2141SB. It's old but still provides splendid output. It'll be a sad day when it dies, since CRT's are just about extinct.

I also achieve much better detail/noise ratios in RAW. You just can't do much with Jpeg in this regard.

When I'm shooting for small prints or uploading to web and don't need dramatic wb correction, Jpeg is usually satisfactory.

Last edited by Lazy Lens; Mar 17, 2010 at 3:37 AM.
Lazy Lens 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 8:16 PM.