User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Raw quality versus JPEG

  1. #1
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Join Date
    24 Oct 2009
    Location
    Dongara. WA.
    Posts
    407
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Raw quality versus JPEG

    Hi Everyone

    When taking photos in RAW is it a better quaility than JPEG straight out of the camera. I am pretty new to this side of digital photography.

    Cheers
    Fisher

  2. #2
    It's all about the Light!
    Tech Admin
    Kym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Jun 2008
    Location
    Modbury, Adelaide
    Posts
    9,639
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Raw is either 12 or 14 bits of colour depth depending on camera model.
    JPG is 8 bits.
    Therefore you have 4 or 6 more bits of dynamic range.
    There is a good write up in NTP.
    http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...ad.php?t=25432
    regards, Kym Gallery Honest & Direct Constructive Critique Appreciated! ©
    Digital & film, Bits of glass covering 10mm to 500mm, and other stuff



  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    22 Jul 2008
    Location
    Rosebud, Mornington Peninsula
    Posts
    2,838
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This post has a lot of info in it that should help you also

    http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...ad.php?t=47708
    Cat (aka Cathy) - Another Canon user - 400D, 18-55,75-300mm Kit Lens,50mm f1.8, Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro, Sigma 28-70 f2.8-4 DG, Tripod and a willingness to learn
    Software used: PhotoImpact, Irfanview and a lot of plugins
    We don't make a photograph just with a camera, we bring to the act of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen, the music we have heard, the people we have loved. - Ansel Adams


  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    20 Mar 2008
    Location
    Glenorchy
    Posts
    4,040
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's not about out of camera quality. Raw has many, many times the information of a jpeg. Jpegs are lossy files, when the camera compresses compresses the file into a jpeg it throws away the unused data. RAW retains everything, but must have post camera processing to bring out the best in the image.

    There are lots of articles on the topic, including some on here. Have a hunt around.
    Odille

    “Can't keep my eyes from the circling sky”

    My Blog | Canon 1DsMkII | 60D | Tokina 20-35mm f/2.8 AF AT-X PRO | EF50mm f/1.8| Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM | Fujifilm X-T1 & X-M1 | Fujinon XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS | Fujinon XC 50-230mm F3.5-5.6 OIS | Fujinon XF 18-55mm F2.8-4R LM OIS | tripods, flashes, filters etc ||

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    09 Jan 2009
    Location
    Blacktown, Sydney
    Posts
    56
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As everyone has said Raw contained more information and great when you need to recover a photo and also post production. Personally find too much mucking around with the RAW file if you don't know what your doing can create unwanted noise and photo will not be as sharp.

    Personally I try and get the photo right in camera and shoot Jpeg.
    Aka - Gaston A

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Gear List

    Camera:Nikon D90 + MB-D80 Batteries grip
    Lenses: Nikon 24-70 F2.8 & Nikon 50mm F1.8
    Tripod: Velbon Sherpa 803R
    Flash: Nikon SB600 with a range of diffusers
    Software: Adobe Lightroom 2 and Photoshop CS3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •