A question for camera people

[dtel]

I have been reading about using RAW instead of JPEG - fine, I have run across many different opinions and some say it makes no difference but some say and can explain why it is better by looking at what is actually does in the camera and how it has better color and more information of the total picture?

I ask because I am trying a new program, Photoshop Elements 6, $100, it was rated the best considering I am not willing to spend over $600 for the best programs. I does RAW so I tried the camera on RAW and it appears that I can see a difference but is it because I wanted an improvement, kind of like audio improvements?

I don't have enough experience with this to know if is an improvement worth using, it is not any harder to touch up pic's in RAW so that is not a problem and unless on a trip for a week I already have enough memory cards ( 8gb) to cover the difference is size they require.

[Jay481985]

I believe its the bitrate. Raw is an uncompressed file and jpeg is compressed. Think of Raw as a cd and jpeg fine as 320 kbps mp3.

[colterphoto1]

You know those color compensation modes like tungsten, FL, daylight, custom white balance?

If you shoot RAW, you can tweak the color curves AFTER you've taken the photo, in Photoshop. It's harder in FINE mode but can be done.

Like Jay says, think of RAW as pure data, like the resolution of film. FINE and other modes are compressed, leaving some data out.

I still normally shoot at FINE which is 4 MP on my D200, it's fine for most work.

[picky]

My wife Verna shoots with a Canon G7 digital rangefinder camera that acts more like an SLR than an rangefinder. Colter has examined it when we were visting his house and he said he liked it. It only outputs JPG stills (the new G9 does RAW, too) but she's always shot it in Superfine mode and uses a 4 gig card (around 850 shots) and carries a 2 gig spare. Although I agree with that RAW has it's benefits, for Verna's general needs, her G7 shot in Superfine mode seems to post-production edit just fine using numerous tools such as Adobe PhotoShop CS2, Paint Shop Pro 9, and even JASC Photo Album 5.

There is one newer Adobe tool which I have seen even beginners get spectacular results with using even JPG files: Adobe PhotoShop Lightroom 2. Admittedly, at $299 it is a bit spendy but I am told it yields easier results than Adobe Photoshop Elements and without the steep learning curve other Adobe products are known to have. There is a 30-day free trial version available on the Adobe site. I am considering buying this for Verna and I to use. -Glenn

[fenderbender]

One of the biggest advantages of shooting in RAW is your digital image is as yet "undeveloped"....when you shoot a jpeg the camera "developes" the image according to spec and throws away the rest of the image.

In RAW mode you can pull the image into software (photoshop, camera raw, Aperture, capture one, many others) that in fact acts like a darkroom giving you a ton of flexibility on how to "develop" the image...and unlike film you can try it infinite ways until you have it just right.....Yes you can adjust a JPEG but with most of the original info gone it is limited. With a RAW file you can adjust to your hearts content and then save the image in any format you desire...the only thing it costs is hard drive space.

to make the analogy to music ...it would be like having a digital recorder capable of capturing at 24/196 but only recording at redbook because you want to make a cd.....fine or copying cd's....but say you were at a live performance and had the chance of capturing something awesome, live........you woul want the most info possible....

If you are a proficient photographer who knows exactly what he wants and how to set the camera/lighting to get it...then saving to JPEG is fast efficient and leaves for a very simple workflow.......If your into experimenting with artistic endeavors and may wish to get that 1 in 1000 shot to blow up 30"X40" then Raw is the way to shoot.....If your snapping shots of the furniture for insurance reasons or posting to Thebes "this minute " thread than JPEG's are the way to go.....

[dtel]

Thanks everybody, I will probably play around with both and get more experience with raw. Most of the pictures I take are just general, outdoors, grandkids, vacations and just for fun, so trying raw will give me more to play with and also learn more about the camera and lighting. Thanks [Y]

[Marvel]

so trying raw will give me more to play with and also learn more about the camera and lighting

If you don't edit the pics much at all, then the jpg format would be fine. If you edit a jpg, save it, go and edit again and again, you will start having a lot of problems with the compressions and artifacts in the image. As Michael says, it is all about the control you have over the image.

My Canon S60 will shoot RAW files, which I do for certain things. Mostly I use a tweaked jpg. A lot of photographers complained when Canon removed the RAW format from the G7, so they put it back in the G9.

Bruce

[fini]

I thought the RAW setting was for nude photography. And the TIFF setting was for when your wife found out you were doing nude photography.

[Cal Blacksmith]

Fini, you nailed it[[:$]

Actually, I use RAW when I am looking for the highest quality I can get (think FINE ART or as close as I can get to it []) and JPEG for everything else that you would use as "snapshots".

[Guest " "]

The RAW mode results in content that is not processed by the internals of the camera. The internals of the camera has a processor to convert the data into TIFF or other formats. Since the quality of the internals vary amoung brands and models, using a RAW option provides for unprocess content that can be processed by more sophisticated topoligies such as computer software and elaborate processors.

If you don't use RAW, you are just re-processing content which was already processed by the cameras internal processors.

The difference in RAW vs TIFF has more to due with the quality of the cameras internal processor. The better the processor, the less of a difference.