Thanks Joves, that goes even further than my earlier attempt to explain the differences. I am a little bit surprised that a forum with so many good photographers participating, that there is such a large misunderstanding of the Raw/Jpg/Tif/etc. file formats available. I'm no expert by any means, but I think I have a fair to middling understanding of them.
Now Leilanee is a really good photographer, so I was surprised to see her comment about her recent Raw photos. Not that she experienced this, but that she seemed surprised by their lesser results compared to her Jpg photos. That's not unusual. Often times, Raw photos are not as good as the Jpg counterpart photos straight out of the camera, & that is exactly why many people shoot only the Jpg or similar format photos. You will get nice photos straight out of the camera (if shot correctly, with proper settings in camera), & they are for the most part more than satisfactory for the general photographer.
The Raw photos, while having all the information for each photo, still needs someone to use that information to get the best out the finished photo. It’s more work, however, if the photographer has a desire or need for a photo that can be processed to its highest degree, then he/she will shoot it in Raw!
This discussion wouldn't even be taking place if digital photography hadn't reached a point where anyone can purchase a really good DSLR camera (capable of taking Raw photos) at prices comparable to what many point & shoot cameras recently sold for. In fact, now many p&S cameras can now do things once reserved for the higher end DSLRs costing thousands of dollars. They can take Raw format photos, some include some form of ‘IS” image stabilization, Zoom or changeable lenses. Things & prices do change for new technologies, it’s a brave new world out there.
Don’t forget, it wasn’t all that long ago that the DSLR cameras started to include video capture that had been a staple in the P&S cameras for years. So what you have now is like the best of everything, it’s really up to you to pick & choose what you want to do with it; it’s there for a reason, although it just might not be for you.
What I find interesting is RAW vs JPEG threads bring the hatred out of people. More than any other thread i've ever seen on the internet.
Keep this civil and it'll stay open
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
Lightpuller wrote: The problem with that is that people print from jpegs not raw files. So your arguments don't make a lot of sense. Why would i need all that extra stuff that can't be used in a final print. Also, a camera should know the best way to process the information, not some program created by people who don't even work for the camera companies.
Like Leilanee said, the results of raw are not as good as jpeg. Seems to me my friend is way off base.
Thank you! I am way smarter than Photoshop gives me credit for.
I do not always print from Jpeg as others have stated. Sometimes I actually print from TIFF, a file format that you cannot create from a Jpeg image. Well you can but it would be a sorry TIFF file to print from.
First I agree that you can get great images in the Jpeg format, but you cannot really add information to that Jpeg, and a Jpeg will never have the same latitude in adjustment that a RAW file has ever. So if you screw a Jpeg image too much when shooting, and you process it to try and make it right, it will look like an over processed image, or under processed, depending on which way you had to settle for. As where with a RAW image I have all of the data of the image to process, and can get a better photo from a screwed one, this too is within reason, some images are just too screwed to fix.
I personally shoot RAW+Jpeg for the very reason that if I screw the image up more than a few adjustments will fix, I can fall back on the RAW. With Jpegs you have to intentionally make your adjustments before you shoot, to get what you may want in an image. I call it pre-processing an image, but even with that you can sometimes get it to wrong to fix it as a Jpeg. You should try it sometime shooting in dual format, and when you run across one that no matter what you do to that Jpeg it never looks quite right, then process the RAW and see how much more you can get out of it. Or actually how much better you can correct it.
To me it sounds like you all have been reading too much Ken Rockwell.
I went on Ken Rockwell's site and he said he has a left handed camera with elephant penis skin custom grip. I'm not sure I can trust him. Some of what he says is very good though. I agree with his views on jpeg.
I've never heard of a Tiff file, what is that? Can cameras shoot in Tiff? Do I need to buy photoshop CS6 to use raw?
No, cameras shoot in RAW. Some can also output RAW as well as JPEG.
Lightpuller wrote: Do I need to buy photoshop CS6 to use raw?
No. There are a number of other software products that can process RAW. Adobe Lightroom is a popular choice. An older version of PS will also do the trick. Even Photoshop Elements can handle RAW files. And, depending on what camera you have, the manufacturer's software might process RAW. I know Nikon's software will do it.
jmk-nbsc wrote:
Now Leilanee is a really good photographer, so I was surprised to see her comment about her recent Raw photos.
O0o0o0ohhh I'm blushing - thank you
My one comment was just a joke, but it's true that I still haven't had that magic moment where I go "Oh THAT'S why I should have been shooting RAW all this time!"
I'm trying it out, and I definitely understand the appeal, but I don't know much yet about successfully manipulating RAW, and so far I work hard enough to get things the way I like them in camera that I haven't had *TOO* many problems with jpeg.
If I play around with RAW enough and try to figure out my RAW editor, I'm sure I'll understand what I've been missing, but I still have a lot to learn is all.
Update from not-much-later:
I played around with all the sliders in the RAW editor and I'm actually pretty happy with the result.
SOOC:
Edit:
It was mostly the grain that bothered me, but I found the noise reduction slider
For me, grain is not an issue, as long as you get the definition that you desire. In this case, her eyes came out quite well, and the lighting is effective.
No, cameras shoot in RAW. Some can also output RAW as well as JPEG.
Lightpuller wrote: Do I need to buy photoshop CS6 to use raw?
No. There are a number of other software products that can process RAW. Adobe Lightroom is a popular choice. An older version of PS will also do the trick. Even Photoshop Elements can handle RAW files. And, depending on what camera you have, the manufacturer's software might process RAW. I know Nikon's software will do it.
What did Nikon get rid of the Tiff format in the format options. My D300 will shoot Tiff, I just do not do that because quite frankly the extra file size does not give you as much latitude in processing as NEF. Now what I would like to see is the option to shoot in DNG. Or what I would like to see is a universal standard RAW format developed and used. This would make things so much better for the end user, or we the customers.
No, cameras shoot in RAW. Some can also output RAW as well as JPEG.
Lightpuller wrote: Do I need to buy photoshop CS6 to use raw?
No. There are a number of other software products that can process RAW. Adobe Lightroom is a popular choice. An older version of PS will also do the trick. Even Photoshop Elements can handle RAW files. And, depending on what camera you have, the manufacturer's software might process RAW. I know Nikon's software will do it.
What did Nikon get rid of the Tiff format in the format options. My D300 will shoot Tiff, I just do not do that because quite frankly the extra file size does not give you as much latitude in processing as NEF. Now what I would like to see is the option to shoot in DNG. Or what I would like to see is a universal standard RAW format developed and used. This would make things so much better for the end user, or we the customers.
My mistake. Your D300, the D700 and D800 will output TIFF. My D600 will not.
Lightpuller wrote: The problem with that is that people print from jpegs not raw files. So your arguments don't make a lot of sense. Why would i need all that extra stuff that can't be used in a final print. Also, a camera should know the best way to process the information, not some program created by people who don't even work for the camera companies.
Like Leilanee said, the results of raw are not as good as jpeg. Seems to me my friend is way off base.
Thank you! I am way smarter than Photoshop gives me credit for.
I do not always print from Jpeg as others have stated. Sometimes I actually print from TIFF, a file format that you cannot create from a Jpeg image. Well you can but it would be a sorry TIFF file to print from.
First I agree that you can get great images in the Jpeg format, but you cannot really add information to that Jpeg, and a Jpeg will never have the same latitude in adjustment that a RAW file has ever. So if you screw a Jpeg image too much when shooting, and you process it to try and make it right, it will look like an over processed image, or under processed, depending on which way you had to settle for. As where with a RAW image I have all of the data of the image to process, and can get a better photo from a screwed one, this too is within reason, some images are just too screwed to fix.
I personally shoot RAW+Jpeg for the very reason that if I screw the image up more than a few adjustments will fix, I can fall back on the RAW. With Jpegs you have to intentionally make your adjustments before you shoot, to get what you may want in an image. I call it pre-processing an image, but even with that you can sometimes get it to wrong to fix it as a Jpeg. You should try it sometime shooting in dual format, and when you run across one that no matter what you do to that Jpeg it never looks quite right, then process the RAW and see how much more you can get out of it. Or actually how much better you can correct it.
To me it sounds like you all have been reading too much Ken Rockwell.
I went on Ken Rockwell's site and he said he has a left handed camera with elephant penis skin custom grip. I'm not sure I can trust him. Some of what he says is very good though. I agree with his views on jpeg.
I've never heard of a Tiff file, what is that? Can cameras shoot in Tiff? Do I need to buy photoshop CS6 to use raw?
lol please don't tell me that actually says that on his site.
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
You've said Tess that you just got this lens and I think that in both versions of the portrait the eyes/face are a bit soft; some of the hair and clothing looks sharper than the face. I'm not sure the lens focused where it needed to be.
You've mentioned on here recently how the camera is setting the shutter too slow, or not focusing exactly where you want it etc. (my digital camera tends to do that too when left to its own devices, I can often hear the shutter's too slow and I have to reset it). I think learning manual settings can provide more control over the camera and how fast or slow the shutter speed is, how small or large the aperture is, where exactly the camera's focused, etc.
I think your composition skills are excellent and your photos show a great deal of creativity. It sounds like you know exactly what you need the camera to do; it would take practice but using manual settings might enable you to use the camera to take photos the way you want.
No, cameras shoot in RAW. Some can also output RAW as well as JPEG.
Lightpuller wrote: Do I need to buy photoshop CS6 to use raw?
No. There are a number of other software products that can process RAW. Adobe Lightroom is a popular choice. An older version of PS will also do the trick. Even Photoshop Elements can handle RAW files. And, depending on what camera you have, the manufacturer's software might process RAW. I know Nikon's software will do it.
What did Nikon get rid of the Tiff format in the format options. My D300 will shoot Tiff, I just do not do that because quite frankly the extra file size does not give you as much latitude in processing as NEF. Now what I would like to see is the option to shoot in DNG. Or what I would like to see is a universal standard RAW format developed and used. This would make things so much better for the end user, or we the customers.
My mistake. Your D300, the D700 and D800 will output TIFF. My D600 will not.
No that is okay, because you just educated me that not all of their cameras have it. I was under the misimpression that all Nikons had it. Now I know better. Thanx.
Lightpuller wrote: The problem with that is that people print from jpegs not raw files. So your arguments don't make a lot of sense. Why would i need all that extra stuff that can't be used in a final print. Also, a camera should know the best way to process the information, not some program created by people who don't even work for the camera companies.
Like Leilanee said, the results of raw are not as good as jpeg. Seems to me my friend is way off base.
Thank you! I am way smarter than Photoshop gives me credit for.
I do not always print from Jpeg as others have stated. Sometimes I actually print from TIFF, a file format that you cannot create from a Jpeg image. Well you can but it would be a sorry TIFF file to print from.
First I agree that you can get great images in the Jpeg format, but you cannot really add information to that Jpeg, and a Jpeg will never have the same latitude in adjustment that a RAW file has ever. So if you screw a Jpeg image too much when shooting, and you process it to try and make it right, it will look like an over processed image, or under processed, depending on which way you had to settle for. As where with a RAW image I have all of the data of the image to process, and can get a better photo from a screwed one, this too is within reason, some images are just too screwed to fix.
I personally shoot RAW+Jpeg for the very reason that if I screw the image up more than a few adjustments will fix, I can fall back on the RAW. With Jpegs you have to intentionally make your adjustments before you shoot, to get what you may want in an image. I call it pre-processing an image, but even with that you can sometimes get it to wrong to fix it as a Jpeg. You should try it sometime shooting in dual format, and when you run across one that no matter what you do to that Jpeg it never looks quite right, then process the RAW and see how much more you can get out of it. Or actually how much better you can correct it.
To me it sounds like you all have been reading too much Ken Rockwell.
I went on Ken Rockwell's site and he said he has a left handed camera with elephant penis skin custom grip. I'm not sure I can trust him. Some of what he says is very good though. I agree with his views on jpeg.
I've never heard of a Tiff file, what is that? Can cameras shoot in Tiff? Do I need to buy photoshop CS6 to use raw?
lol please don't tell me that actually says that on his site.
He does actually say that on the site. It's on the "About" page, way down at the bottom.
icepics wrote: You've said Tess that you just got this lens and I think that in both versions of the portrait the eyes/face are a bit soft; some of the hair and clothing looks sharper than the face. I'm not sure the lens focused where it needed to be.
You've mentioned on here recently how the camera is setting the shutter too slow, or not focusing exactly where you want it etc. (my digital camera tends to do that too when left to its own devices, I can often hear the shutter's too slow and I have to reset it). I think learning manual settings can provide more control over the camera and how fast or slow the shutter speed is, how small or large the aperture is, where exactly the camera's focused, etc.
I think your composition skills are excellent and your photos show a great deal of creativity. It sounds like you know exactly what you need the camera to do; it would take practice but using manual settings might enable you to use the camera to take photos the way you want.
I really don't appreciate your condescending tone with me, so please read what I have said carefully before dishing out advice:
I also deem that I need a lot more time and practice to get used to this lens, as it's got an enormous range and I'm used to only one focal length (50 mm)
Working with AI Servo made the shutter a bit too slow for my liking
AI Servo is a setting that generally works at a slower pace because the camera tries to keep continued focus on a moving subject. I wanted more frames than AI Servo would allow, so I sacrificed image quality there, knowing very well what was going on.
even though I've been very particular with the points I tell the lens to focus on (I do autofocus, but I manually choose my focus points), I was quite disappointed to see that a lot of my photos from today were more focused on the background than my model
Never had this problem with my other lenses, and though I do shoot ONLY in Manual mode, I use auto focus because my eyesight and judgement using the viewfinder are usually worse than the camera's when getting a properly focused image.
I usually have my aperture at around 2.5-3.0 for my 50 mm lens, and the lowest f-stop at 50 mm on this lens is 5.0 (bye bye bokeh/pretty background blur ), and because I prefer to keep the aperture at its lowest possible value (for this lens, at least), I had to pay attention to my settings a lot more than I'm used to because the lowest aperture changes for each focal length, and I was certainly taking advantage of my new opportunity to zoom and take photos at various focal lengths. This, again, will simply take some adjusting, since I've learned to be a lazy photographer and go on autopilot (most of the time) once I've found my magic settings, using the single focal length and all.
I am very familiar with aperture, and I manipulate it all the time.
The lowest aperture of this new lens does not meet my usual standards.
I'm aware that I do need practice, but I'm also aware of the mechanics involved, and I fully understand how my camera functions, thanks.
Hopefully in the near future I'll be able to get some more crisp, cleaner looking images with it, however I will probably be going back to my old 50 mm from time to time, because I love that lens to death.
I do intend to go back to the one I know how to use.
The purpose of the image in THIS thread, was to show that I managed to figure out my RAW editor and successfully edit a photo to my taste.
I was not requesting criticism on the composition of the photo, because I know it didn't turn out well. None did from that shoot, and I assure you that such is much below my own standards.
Just to bring my argument to rest and keep my dignity intact: eyes have always actually been much of a mark for my photography:
Taken 2 or 3 years ago
Taken nearly 4 years ago
2 years ago
Last year
Attachments:
Last Edit: 11 years 3 months ago by Leilanee. Reason: context
Then I guess I'm misunderstanding what you're posting about, I don't know offhand what other threads I read. It seemed like you were using other settings besides manual and were trying to get the shutter speed set the way you wanted it, etc. and it didn't seem like it was working the way you needed. Sorry if it came across differently than intended.
Naw, I don't think so. I think brand fanaticism (fanboys) is much more volatile & divisive, & it doesn't have to apply to photography. Think Win vs Mac...
The Fujifilm XT5 is a 40MP mirrorless camera capable of 6.2K video at 30p. With those specs, it’s an ideal choice for photographers needing a camera to pull double duty for imaging and video.
The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!
Nikon’s retro-looking Nikon Zfc is anything but retro. Under its classic body is a host of features and amenities that make it a worthwhile compact mirrorless camera for 2024.
The Canon EOS R50 is one of the newest R-system cameras from Canon. Is it worth your money? Find out all the details you need to know in this comprehensive review.
Urban photography is a genre showcasing features in urban settings. You can photograph people, architecture, mass transit, and many other subjects. Learn how to do so in this guide!
The Nikon D850 might be an older DSLR, but it was ahead of its time when it debuted in 2017. That means it still has plenty of firepower to compete with today’s powerful mirrorless cameras.
The best beginner camera isn’t the same for everyone. That means having choice is of the utmost importance. In this guide, explore five excellent beginner camera options for 2024 and beyond.
Child portrait photography is a unique undertaking requiring special skills and talents to get the best results. Start mastering this photography niche with these essential tips!
The Fujifilm XT5 is a 40MP mirrorless camera capable of 6.2K video at 30p. With those specs, it’s an ideal choice for photographers needing a camera to pull double duty for imaging and video.
Using leading lines in photography helps improve the composition by drawing viewers in and leading their eye from the foreground to the background. Explore some fine examples of this in this guide!
The Insta360 has one of the best lineups of action cams and 360-degree cameras. With these Insta360 accessories, you can elevate your photography and videography game!
Creating impactful photos of landscapes depends on many factors, not the least of which is your talent behind the lens. This guide explores other elements required for the best product.
), and because I prefer to keep the aperture at its lowest possible value (for this lens, at least), I had to pay attention to my settings a lot more than I'm used to because the lowest aperture changes for each focal length, and I was certainly taking advantage of my new opportunity to zoom and take photos at various focal lengths. This, again, will simply take some adjusting, since I've learned to be a lazy photographer and go on autopilot (most of the time) once I've found my magic settings, using the single focal length and all.
cleaningwa... 2 posts
ropertjohn 1 post
