RAW vs JPG

[Tommo224]

With how cheap portable hard drives are (the small 2.5" ones), like mentioned before, go for that. And like you said, load them up each night in the hotel

I really recommend the small 2.5" pocket ones (powered by the USB cable only), as the 3.5" with power supply would be heavy for travel!

16gb SD card in my camera will fit maybe 600-700 RAW photos.

On a holiday, guaranteed you'll smash that!!

1tb = $98
500gb = $69
http://www.officeworks.com.au/retail...et-Hard-Drives

[geoffsta]

I agree with Tommo. Took the 1gb pocked HDD on my holiday and little laptop. Easy as.
The hard part now is going through them all on the big computer.

[camerasnoop]

Here's something else for you to think about too. Sure you can take ONE of thos portable digital wallets. I have used one myself. So you shoot all day and fill up your cards, so you download the cards to the portable device. So now you have one copy of all of your images, because you are going to wipe your cards so you can use them again. No backup? What are you going to do for a backup? Drop that portable device, and I guarantee it will be dead when you pick it up.

Don't take just one storage device. Take a backup too. Now you're going to have to decide what your backup strategy is going to be. Oh, and don't keep your backup in the same place as the original. People go on holidays and they just forget all about good practice for keeping your data safe. Going overseas and losing all or some of your images might take the gloss of that once-in-a-lifetime trip.

[Tommo1965]

we just got back from a trip .... London /italy for 6 weeks...I had two 16 gig CF cards for writing raw ..and two 16 gig ds cards that I wrote Jpegs to...I had a 700Gig WD P/harddrive...my daughter had a net book.. when the cards were full..we downloaded to these devices.....I only shot raw for the " just in case I got a really good shot moment" or needed to correct what could have been a good image...but mostly the Jpegs were fine

[christay]

I've only just switched over to shooting in RAW. Much better processing but don't like the graininess very much even though you can get rid of 95% of it.

[camerasnoop]

I've only just switched over to shooting in RAW. Much better processing but don't like the graininess very much even though you can get rid of 95% of it.

Experience will fix that.

[Stevie]

I also prefer to us RAW as it gives me greater control over the image, and I suppose I can create a jpeg if I want, can not go back the other way.

[jgeor21]

I've only just switched over to shooting in RAW. Much better processing but don't like the graininess very much even though you can get rid of 95% of it.

Unlike most ppl, i have only been into digital photography and always used RAW. Haven,t really noticed the graininess but then again not comparing it to jpeg. That being said wouldn't that be due to a totally unprocessed RAW file, no filtering, no adjusted rendering etc ?.
I reckon using JPEG over RAW would be like driving a porsche 911 round corners at 60. Why would you when you could do 100.

[ricktas]

Unlike most ppl, i have only been into digital photography and always used RAW. Haven,t really noticed the graininess but then again not comparing it to jpeg. That being said wouldn't that be due to a totally unprocessed RAW file, no filtering, no adjusted rendering etc ?.
I reckon using JPEG over RAW would be like driving a porsche 911 round corners at 60. Why would you when you could do 100.

I agree, a RAW will likely show more graininess as a JPG using an algorithm to resize the file, compares pixels beside each other and tweaks them to save filespace, this tweaking would mean that some smoothing would occur, just as a by product of the JPG algorithm, thus a JPG may appear to have less graniness (at a high quality JPG level), than the RAW file.

[claytonchatham]

There is no problem shooting in .jpg The only problem is you need to get the shot perfect because there's very little leeway in post. If you shoot in RAW there's alot more opportunity to fix minor issues.

[arthurking83]

.....
I reckon using JPEG over RAW would be like driving a porsche 911 round corners at 60. Why would you when you could do 100.

The analogy of raw/jpg and vehicles is made in reverse.
With the car analogy here, you seem to want to speed, and hence if this is the case, then jpg over raw any time and every time.
One of the reason s you shoot jpg is for speed!

Raw file mode is simply for better control and quality.

That is, if you choose to make an analogy with a motor vehicle, choosing to use raw file mode is similar to driving the latest Roller around this same bend at 50, where you get a more comfortable and quality ride whilst maintaining a lot more control over the manoeuvre.
When compared to the Porsche at 100, which is similar to jpg shooting choosing this style is akin to foregoing quality and control for speed alone.
Make a mistake and you can end up in more trouble as a result.

Raw has nothing to do with speed.


A properly processed raw file will always make for a higher quality final image result than a jog shot in camera.
If you have aspirations to print larger than large, then raw is the better way forward.

[msm1707]

I was wondering if someone could advise me on changing my photos from JPEG to RAW. I know where to change them - but dont know which one to change it to. There are a few different options in there and Im not sure which to go with. I will be shooting a wedding as a backup photographer in a months time and wanted to practice with RAW. It has an option to put it to maximum Jpeg and max RAW at the same time but I just took a photo thinking it would save it as one copy jpeg and one raw - but it didn't. I have a 50D.

Any advice would be great.

Thanks so much

MSM

[Doninoz]

I was wondering if someone could advise me on changing my photos from JPEG to RAW. I know where to change them - but dont know which one to change it to. There are a few different options in there and Im not sure which to go with. I will be shooting a wedding as a backup photographer in a months time and wanted to practice with RAW. It has an option to put it to maximum Jpeg and max RAW at the same time but I just took a photo thinking it would save it as one copy jpeg and one raw - but it didn't. I have a 50D.

Any advice would be great.

Thanks so much

MSM

If you look at page 61 of your manual you will be able to follow how to set the camera to take RAW and also take RAW + a JPEG together.

If you don't have a manual??? then B&H have one here... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/lit_files/80.pdf.

You will have to use the software that came with the camera to edit and save the RAW image or with another program like photoshop that has the Canon RAW add-on.

If you have a big card, go for the RAW with the maximum pixels. You don't need to have a JPEG as well unless you want to give a copy of photos off your camera straight away. But as a photographer, that's not always the best way to present your images...you have the option to "fix up" any problems in RAW before giving them to your customer. Then they don't see your failures!

[Tommo224]

@MSM:
My recommendation is shoot in RAW, then use software like Adobe Lightroom 3.5.
It manages the photos really really well, and is quite easy to use.

It is all I use to edit photos now!

New Catalogue, Import Photos, Select the Good Ones, Edit, Export to JPG. DONE!

[jgeor21]

The analogy of raw/jpg and vehicles is made in reverse.
With the car analogy here, you seem to want to speed, and hence if this is the case, then jpg over raw any time and every time.
One of the reason s you shoot jpg is for speed!

Raw file mode is simply for better control and quality.

That is, if you choose to make an analogy with a motor vehicle, choosing to use raw file mode is similar to driving the latest Roller around this same bend at 50, where you get a more comfortable and quality ride whilst maintaining a lot more control over the manoeuvre.
When compared to the Porsche at 100, which is similar to jpg shooting choosing this style is akin to foregoing quality and control for speed alone.
Make a mistake and you can end up in more trouble as a result.

Raw has nothing to do with speed.


A properly processed raw file will always make for a higher quality final image result than a jog shot in camera.
If you have aspirations to print larger than large, then raw is the better way forward.

I agree. The point I guess I was making was more in reference to the capability of a modern digital camera. Why chose a lesser quality setting? You hit the nail on the head Artherking83. SPEED!!!..
I use fast CF cards and when I've filled them up with massive RAW files and had to use my older slower cards you really notice the difference. The other day not the best scenario (their must be an easier way or some trick / technique ?) I was trying to photograph lightning strikes. Wind was blowing trees waving everywhere so didn't want to just open the shutter. So was just taking successive shots one after the other, with the fast cards no problem, but a total waste of time with the slower cards.
At the risk of using another analogy. It,s horses for courses, both RAW and JPEG have there place in digital photography.

[martz8]

I read somewhere that CR2 Raw files from a 550D are about 12 megs a piece. vs a meg or 2 for a JPG depending upon the variance of colour/contrast in a scene.

The big difference is in the bit depth.

JPG is 8 Bits per pixel where raw is 14 or 16 bits per pixel
that effectively doubles the ammount of data per pixel and also doubles the effective colour range available.
and all this is before you take jpg's compression into account.

Me, I shoot JPG, untill i have something i really want to keep or looks awesome in the viewfinder, then i hit the (pentax) dedicated RAW button 1 shot 1 raw.

Same here if I see somthing I like or can work with I will then shoot in RAW

[CHardy]

I have wondered the same thing....RAW v's JPEG...and last week I finally bit the bullet, changed my camera to RAW+JPEG file and snapped a few photos of a 6 month old baby....gave mum the disc of jpeg images, and had a look at the RAW files, and thats as far as I got.... I have Photoshop Elements 9 that I use for cropping and not much else...Reading the above helpful comments, I had better learn to use my elements program, then start to use the RAW option more often. Look forward to seeing some of your images....mine, well, might be a while away yet...

[wahaha]

Just got back from my trip from Canada, was loads of fun!

Ended up only using a little over 24 GB of shots but would have had plenty more if the missus would have allowed it =)

Will upload some in the land and seascapes forum soon I guess.

Cheers

[Ganzer]

i shoot in raw, because it easier to edit, and in my Canon 1D mkIII i have 16gb between the cards. today at the V8 supercars i took 1094 photos and still have room for another 500 photos.

[bricat]

That wasn't ypu Ganzer lumping a lens around on your shoulders. Caught a glimps on TV HUGE Canon I think