| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
RAW or JPEG???
Brian Light, Photographer
 |
Pennsville | NJ | USA | Posted: 6:18 PM on 06.11.03 |
->> I know alot of this depends on who you are shooting for but how do you generally shoot?
RAW or JPEG? Quality of JPEG?
I have a Canon 10D and generally shoot JPEG Fine. I can get between 750-800 images on a 1 gig card. My output tends to be Web Page on up to 20" x 30" Frontier Prints.
Just wondering what other think on the subject. |
|
Chris Jennings, Photographer, Assistant
|
Sherman | TX | USA | Posted: 6:53 PM on 06.11.03 |
| ->> Canon 10D, jpg fine. Generally the same output as you. |
|
Brian Light, Photographer
|
Pennsville | NJ | USA | Posted: 8:13 PM on 06.11.03 |
->> Actually the reason I brought this up is yesterday at a NJ State Group 1 championship game, won by our hometown team for the second year in a row was a press photographer shooting along side of me. He was shooting with a Canon 1D and shoots at a lower quality as he was more concerned about getting 2,000 plus shots on his two gig card. I just feel shooting too low in quality deadends a possible great shot.
I have (1) 1 gig card, (1) 500 Meg card and (3) 250 Meg cards. I would shoot RAW but I don't want to hack the Photoshop RAW plug-in as I hear it's not really perfected for the 10D anyway. So I stick with Large JPEG fine. I'm also on a Mac.
I also have tried many other Photo Browser packages that others here like but always find myself back into iPhoto 2 which I find as vastly improved over the iPhoto 1. I load into iPhoto, burn to a CD right after bringing them in using the built in Burner icon on iPhoto. I actually go back and burn copies of these and keep a set at a different location, nothing sexy like a bank vault or anything, just my parents house a couple miles away.
I scan through them once using the iPhoto edit area then change the preference to open in Photoshop and edit and correct those that need it into Photoshop 7. Then export either to Web or my friendly Fuju Frontier photo studio as need dictates.
I like iPhoto and a little third companion program called Better HTML Exporter to export my web pages. I am working on a template to be able to use my Webcatalog program as a way to take orders entirely in house through my own web servers. I can do up to 8 x 10 in house and this way only need to upload the files for the few larger images I may need.
Just what I find working for me. |
|
Tom Aellis, Photographer
|
Marlboro | NJ | USA | Posted: 8:49 AM on 06.12.03 |
| ->> With memory being so cheap these days, in relative terms, and a one time expense I can't think of any advantage of not shooting RAW. I've not yet once shot jpeg. |
|
Larry W. Smith, Photographer
|
Valley Center | KS | USA | Posted: 9:57 AM on 06.12.03 |
->> I am shooting with the Nikon D1X, D1H, and I always shoot jpg fine on both if your shooting for daily and on deadline sometimes you don't have time to convert RAW's. I also shoot for a catalog company and we shoot products and fashion and print double truck pages and I still always shoot jpg fine, we have used these files for a display in a mall and the display is six feet tall and four feet wide, I have printed up to 24"X30" print this way . I think if you have the time and want to use RAW's you will get images you can have more control over in the long run, but for me personally I still prefer the jpg fine mode I haven't had any client say to me the image was not usable because it was a jpg. My experience.
Larry |
|
Phil Wever, Photographer
|
Aurora | IL | USA | Posted: 10:23 AM on 06.12.03 |
->> I'm shooting a Fuji S2 and we always do fine Jpg. I steer away from the RAW just because there is too much of a hassle to use the RAW convert from Fuji.
I too like Larry Smith shoot ads with this camera all the time and they run double truck in magazines etc. I have only had one client that specifically requested TIFF files. But quite honestly I didn't see any difference with the quality in their end application.
Check out my members gallery and you can see some of the ad shots.
On the other side of the coin - even if I have a shot that is "just for web" I still shoot it on Fine Jpg. Just to CYA basically - because I know that the call could come in. "We really liked that shot you did for the website, we would like to use it in our brochure." I'd rather have the big file sitting there ready to go...
Phil |
|
Michael J. Treola, Photographer
|
Neptune | NJ | USA | Posted: 11:39 AM on 06.12.03 |
->> Brian,
I was one of those guys who always thought that JPEG Fine would always be enough for me and how I shoot. I couldn’t think of any reason why me, a newspaper photographer, who photos prints on toilet paper, would ever need anything more. Well my thinking has changed after spending some time shooting Raw.
Here are the reasons I like raw images. The latitude of the image itself allows me to re-adjust the color balance and exposure if I’m off a bit (or sometimes more). Try doing that with a jpeg. I also find that the AWB to never be quite right and I use the Raw image to tweak the color balance right from the get go. The raw image compared to the jpeg side by side is the clear winner of quality.
Here is what I don’t like about Raw. #1 is workflow. It takes longer to edit photos for sure. It’s not terrible but does add to that time. If I’m on tight deadline I’ll shoot jpeg just because I can edit and ship a jpeg photo quicker. Next would be the reduction of buffer when shooting with the drive so learning when and where to use the drive on sports is important. Lastly would be the need for more cards. Thankfully CF cards are cheap and not a huge cost factor these days. I’ve ordered 4 cards just this week and will continue to do so until I feel that I have enough to do the same job in Raw as I would in Jpeg.
Lastly I suggest you try it yourself. If you have a Canon 1D set it to shoot raw and jpegs on each frame you take. Open the photos side by side and see the difference. You undoubtedly see something amazingly different. |
|
Ed J. Szalajeski, Photographer
|
Yarmouth | ME | USA | Posted: 11:56 AM on 06.12.03 |
->> I a now a RAW shooter, as Michael J. Treola said, it only adds a little overhead and takes away from the buffer.
On my 10D, I shoot RAW+JPG (well embedded JPG) I made the switch after talking with several SS members about an over exposure/underexposure problem I was having with my 10D in varying light. (mostly user judgement error or trusting the on camera meter too much)
With RAW, I can adjust an F Stop +/-, Color Balance, and set Temp after the shooting a lot easier than using JEDI PhotoShop techniques.
That said, if I am shooting something in constant light, and a tight deadline, I too shoot in the Highest quality JPG. I do this knowing, that I am not going to get much wiggle room.
Almost a comparison between shooting in Negative Film vs. Slide Film.
Good discussion.
One last point, as stated above it adds time to your digital workflow. Yet, saves your behind if the initial image is not dead on.
EJ Szalajeski |
|
Richard Uhlhorn, Photographer
|
Chelan | WA | USA | Posted: 12:02 PM on 06.12.03 |
| ->> It depends on what the assignment is. For the newspaper with the 10D I shoot JPEG fine. For myself and clients I shoot raw because generally I have the time to convert the raw images which are then stored on my computer as my negatives. I duplicate and convert the raw image to a jpeg for the client before making any changes to it and then burn them to a CD. |
|
Dave Cheng, Photographer
|
Toronto | ON | Canada | Posted: 12:26 PM on 06.12.03 |
| ->> RAW+JPEG on a 1D -- the best of both worlds. It does hurt the card and buffer space a bit, but in the end, you have your quick-and-dirty JPEG for deadline, and a much higher quality RAW file to save your butt in case you've severely under/overexposed. |
|
Travis Mathews, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Columbia | MO | USA | Posted: 1:32 PM on 06.12.03 |
| ->> RAW+JPEG is a very nice feature. I would use it much more often if the camera kept the JPEGs and the RAWs in separate folders on the card. It's confusing when you browse two versions of each file in Photo Mechanic. Oh well, can't win them all I guess. |
|
Glenn Danforth, Photographer
|
Gainesville | FL | USA | Posted: 1:34 PM on 06.12.03 |
->> About a month ago I got an assignment to shoot the Jax Jaguars mini-camp for a trading card company (got the assignment from my SportsShooter page no less) and they insisted I shoot Raw. I thought it was strange but hey, it was a good paycheck so took the job. After security removed me from the field I found out that Raw was actually a format on my 1D. So, I put on some clothes and went back and shot the mini-camp.
But seriously … It was my first time shooting Raw but I didn’t have to edit what I shot. (All I had to do was copy the shots to CDs and ship which was a first but was soooo nice I felt like I was stealing their money.) The only thing I did immediately was to convert them to jpegs so I could dig out a couple of shots of Byron Leftwich for another client. I didn’t make any adjustments to the Raw files as I was under two deadlines and didn’t want to chance it. But I was intrigued by the possibilities.
Yesterday I finally finished two big projects and had time to delve a bit deeper into playing with my Raw files. For almost 10 hours last night I downloaded and installed all the Canon upgrades (including the firmware I was afraid to install until I was sure I’d have time to repair anything that went wrong), scoured the Web for info on the Raw format and played with the Raw files I had shot.
I’ve known for a long time that that Raw had advantages over jpeg but now that I’ve seen what it can do I doubt I will be shooting anything but Raw from now on. It was quite a rush to see dark pictures I would dump in a heartbeat if they were jpegs turn into perfectly exposed pictures. I figure if Raw is this great with the Canon software I’m going to have a field day with Capture One or the Adobe Raw converter!
Now I have to decide if I want to dish out the extra money for such software or wait until Adobe includes their converter with Photoshop (which they have said they are going to do). Does anyone have a guess as to when we’ll see the next major update of Photoshop? I’m guessing it’s not far off but that’s just a guess. |
|
David Albers, Student/Intern
|
Saint Louis | MO | United States | Posted: 9:56 PM on 06.12.03 |
| ->> This is juicy stuff. |
|
Lester Kuhn, Photographer
|
Punta Gorda | FL | USA | Posted: 11:56 PM on 06.15.03 |
| ->> Nikon View 5 can read and edit RAW images. I was converting my images to 16 bit tiff images from the RAW and ended up with a 34.7 MB file from my D1X. Image size was almost 7 x 10 at 300 dpi. For newspaper work I just shoot at jpeg fine (large files resolution). These files are larger than the newspaper can reproduce anyway as we crop at 40 or 54 picas at 200 dpi. I can crop a small area of my image and still have a sharp one. But for artsy work or a large reprint, RAW is the way to go. No clipping or loss of info. Plenty of info for those large prints. |
|
Paul Kauk, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Baton Rouge | LA | usa | Posted: 2:59 AM on 06.16.03 |
->> Glenn -
A friend of mine has seen a beta version of Photoshop 8... should be soon...
P |
|
Matt Cashore, Photographer
|
South Bend | IN | USA | Posted: 11:41 AM on 06.16.03 |
| ->> Ya know...when shooting Raw+JPEG on the 1D, you can sort the files in the card (or folder if you transfer before viewing) by size, which would put all the Raw images on the top, and all the JPEGs on the bottom. Then you could very quickly grab and drop the JPEG's into a separate folder you've already created. Presto...One folder of Raw, one of JPEGs. Not a time consuming chore at all, at least on a Mac. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 10:27 PM on 06.16.03 |
->> On deadline, I shoot RAW + large Jpeg for the paper. Instead of viewing each image in the Canon's Raw viewer. I just convert everything that looks good to jpeg and edit from there while adding caption info. Practically speaking in the time it takes to peek at one file you can convert 15 files to jpeg (at least on my machine).
Stuff I don't like I just delete after I transmit. 10D users might try it to see if this suits your workflow better. Stuff that looks good but need tweaked I can go back and fix, add caption, and away it goes. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|