icepics wrote: So what type of information does the jpeg process discard?
It depends on the processing parameters. If you have them set to BW it would discard the color info for instance. Or it may be set to high contrast; later if you wanted to go low contrast you might find parts of the tonal range missing.
I wouldn't compare raw to a negative, but rather to exposed but undeveloped print film. There are plenty of processing adjustments that can be made in the development stage of film. I always tried to accomplish most of my contrast adjustments with film using exposure and development changes, and used multi-contrast printing filters for fine tuning.
icepics wrote: So what type of information does the jpeg process discard?
It depends on the processing parameters. If you have them set to BW it would discard the color info for instance. Or it may be set to high contrast; later if you wanted to go low contrast you might find parts of the tonal range missing.
I wouldn't compare raw to a negative, but rather to exposed but undeveloped print film. There are plenty of processing adjustments that can be made in the development stage of film. I always tried to accomplish most of my contrast adjustments with film using exposure and development changes, and used multi-contrast printing filters for fine tuning.
The big difference is that if you screw up the initial processing of a negative, you're toast. RAW gives you the opportunity to reprocess that undeveloped film and correct mistakes at that stage.
Jpegs are great for snapshots, web (like Facebook) photos, and sometimes extreme action photos where getting multiple shots may trump quality (due to a slower cards buffering limitations).
For JPG processing I always save my edited versions with a unique file name, then the original is never altered. I can very easily start over at any time. This practice is about as simple as basic computer editing gets, regardless of the type of file. I've always been greatly puzzled by the argument that a edited JPG can never be recovered. Just pull up the original!!!!
Kelly, not to the level of a RAW. Go take some pics with your camera on VIVID or other camera tweaks that change the gamma of the camera. These things get immediately applied to the image in JPEG mode and are irreversible.
Keeping the camera settings close to "neutral" will give you the best JPEG original, but even then it's been converted from 12 (or 14) bits to 8.
I know that. I also know if I set Vivid in the camera, I have zero interest in working from Faithful! Also, many advanced editing tools work only with 8-bit channel depth. So at that point you've stepped away from RAW anyways.
Err, I have been using RAW for the last 2 years. And I now do all of my shooting in RAW. Agree that it's not hard (with a decent editor). But so far I have not found RAW to be a magic bullet. Only marginally better than JPG. Thus I do not beat the RAW drum as hard as others.
That's the message I've been trying to get through here...
"There are no magic bullets, or gadgets or anything that will make your work stand out."
It's simply knowing what your camera settings do, and understanding the physics of light.
Then you can shape it, mold it, pose it, or frame it any way you want. It's easy.
Don't believe the pretenders that are selling you how hard photography is. Great work can be made with your beginner camera, a 50mm lens and a reflector. You can't buy it, you learn it.
Thanks: [/quot
With all due respect Adrian shouldnt you be asking the originator of the thread if he/she wants it to be combined, isnt it there right in a democracy to have there own thread out there, you are assuming that everyone wants to go to one large thread for info, this site after all is about us all interacting and helping each other.
This an observation not a complaint by the way, I can see your purpose in what you are doing.
Combining threads like this is very common practice on forums.
I specifically made a thread (linked in my signature and stickied in the beginners section) that has many RAW vs Jpeg style threads. There is and there was no need for a new one.
So to answer your question. No I don't need to ask them first, they should have looked about a bit first.
If the question is reasonably original I won't combine the thread, but we've had around 10 threads on the topic now and that is just messy.
I know you dont need to ask but isnt it just a courteous thing to do as this is the most friendly forum regarding photography, as I said it wasnt a complaint just an observation. as I said people like to have their own threads it makes them feel as though they are contributing positively, plus they may want the extra points !!, looking around isnt always easy as some of these threads disappear to the back pages very quickly and I know you will say they can go into a particular area to find it, but its my bet that most people on here will click on recent topics and go through a few pages depending on how much time they have, its just human nature.
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.
Thanks: [/quot
With all due respect Adrian shouldnt you be asking the originator of the thread if he/she wants it to be combined, isnt it there right in a democracy to have there own thread out there, you are assuming that everyone wants to go to one large thread for info, this site after all is about us all interacting and helping each other.
This an observation not a complaint by the way, I can see your purpose in what you are doing.
Combining threads like this is very common practice on forums.
I specifically made a thread (linked in my signature and stickied in the beginners section) that has many RAW vs Jpeg style threads. There is and there was no need for a new one.
So to answer your question. No I don't need to ask them first, they should have looked about a bit first.
If the question is reasonably original I won't combine the thread, but we've had around 10 threads on the topic now and that is just messy.
I know you dont need to ask but isnt it just a courteous thing to do as this is the most friendly forum regarding photography, as I said it wasnt a complaint just an observation. as I said people like to have their own threads it makes them feel as though they are contributing positively, plus they may want the extra points !!, looking around isnt always easy as some of these threads disappear to the back pages very quickly and I know you will say they can go into a particular area to find it, but its my bet that most people on here will click on recent topics and go through a few pages depending on how much time they have, its just human nature.
Scotty we can all see search but as I keep repeating human nature dictates that people will prefer to post there own threads, I dont think I have ever used the search tab on here, do a poll and I bet most people come on here and go into recent topics then skip through the pages.
www.dcimages.org.uk
"A good photograph is one that communicate a fact, touches the heart, leaves the viewer a changed person for having seen it. It is, in a word, effective." - Irving Penn
Organization is fundamental to the growth and strength of a forum.
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.
Scotty wrote: Organization is fundamental to the growth and strength of a forum.
Organisation can be very boring also
www.dcimages.org.uk
"A good photograph is one that communicate a fact, touches the heart, leaves the viewer a changed person for having seen it. It is, in a word, effective." - Irving Penn
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.
The Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II is Sony’s flagship mirrorless zoom lens. As such, it’s loaded with features and has a top-shelf build quality that makes it a top pick!
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.
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!
The Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV is a micro four thirds camera released in 2020. It’s an entry-level system along with the OM-D E-M5 Mark III. Use this guide to determine which one is best for you!
Blue hour photography might not be as well known as golden hour photography, but it is every bit as good a time to create epic images of landscapes. Learn how in this quick tutorial!
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.
