Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 29, 2005, 8:17 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 41
Default

So I read that the RAW file format saves the white balance, contrast, and saturation processing seperately in the file. How much difference would I see in a final photo if I applied these effects on a RAW file with the Pentax Photo lab or photoshop instead of using photoshop effects on a JPEG image? Do most of you experts use RAW files?
mutty is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 29, 2005, 8:48 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
errno_gmm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 518
Default

you will notice a big difference when shooting low light - high ISO.
errno_gmm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2005, 9:18 PM   #3
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

actually .raw saves nothing except what the cam sees. no settings at all. that's the beauty of it. you get to set the parameters
you get to set everything after the fact.. i only shoot in rawin M or Av. not too long ago i was bored and went out and shot some at the lowest jpeg setting. the unfortunate thing is i shot a couple of great images.. not much i can do to them now..
  Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2005, 6:07 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 30
Default

You can get some very good shots straight out of the camera shooting JPEG, but I find that RAW files are much more consistent for giving me the highest quality files to work with.

I find that the RAW files take adjustmentsmuch better than the JPEG files, and nearly always end up looking much more crisp and snappy than a JPEG. Each time you edit and save a JPEG you lose a little bit of file quality due to compression, but you can make adjustments to a RAW file with no loss in quality at all.

I agree with errno_gmmabout low light shooting. A processed RAW file is nearly always much less noisy than a JPEG straight from the camera at ISO 800 and up.

I use Rawshooter Essentials to process my RAW files, it's a really great bit of (free!) software.

http://photos.edgladwin.com/ - my gallery & shop
ejgladwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2005, 10:22 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
errno_gmm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 518
Default

the downside they are just raw sensor data and are around 10 meg.

I think i remember seeing somethign for windows that gives you thumbnails in explorer.
errno_gmm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2005, 6:05 AM   #6
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

http://www.dpmagic.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2005, 10:34 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 41
Default

So, just to be clear, RAW format would not help much for correcting under/overexposed pictures, right?
mutty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2005, 10:36 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
thekman620's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,084
Default

Flexiblility is the beauty of RAW. If you don't like they way you processed it, you can start all over again. The range of changing exposure and other settings is far wider than dealing with jpeg files. Detailis better in RAW files too. I keep a separate folder for RAW files, and when I get enough data in that folder, burn 'em to a dvd.......thekman.
thekman620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2005, 10:38 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
thekman620's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,084
Default

mutty wrote:
Quote:
So, just to be clear, RAW format would not help much for correcting under/overexposed pictures, right?

Just the opposite. You can save an overexposed photo using a RAW program as long as it's not totally blown out, and underexposed photos are a breeze to deal with. Try RAW Shooter Essentials 2005. It's free and it's fairly easy to use. Has most of what you need to use RAW and convert to jpg..........thekman.
thekman620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2005, 11:33 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
errno_gmm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 518
Default

Going to a friends CD launch tonight, my fastest lens is a 50mm f/2, and if i can get close enough I will use that, but my best telephoto is my elcheapo sigma 200mm f/4-5.6. So ill shoot the thing in RAW, and a couple shots in jpeg and post them here so you can see the difference.

Only problem I have is that my 1gig sd card only holds 90 RAW photos, 338 jpegs @ full quality. I think I need more SD cards.
errno_gmm 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 11:30 AM.