Raw vs. JPEG

[Jennifer_Nathe]

Hi, I'm new here and i'm looking to buy my first digital SLR and am doing some research on the different features and capabilities the ones in my price range have ($300- 750). Any assistance would be appreciated and please use english since i'm new. lol... i'm going to be posting different questions as i go but for now i want to know what the differences is in Raw vs JPEG?

[WesternGuy]

Hi Jennifer, and welcome to the forum. We are a very friendly group here. There is a quite a range of experience, so please do not hesitate to ask any question at all - we are only to happy to help.

As far as what to purchase, it is very hard to say, because you will get different opinions from every individual camp - me, I am a Canon guy and am thus biased in that direction and if you are just looking to "break in" to DSLR photography then take a look at some of the basic Canon Rebel line, e.g., the Rebel XS, or the Tni line where n=1,2,3, as well as the Rebel T3. Best bet is to do your research, settle on a price range (which you have done) and then take a visit to your local camera store and get some "hands-on" demonstrations, particularly for the "feel" in your hands - not every camera will feel identical, some may be too small, some too bulky, etc. Once you have narrowed your choices down to a few (two or three)models, which will often come in a "kit" with one or two lenses, then post back in the appropriate sub-forum here and get some experienced advice from others. There are, of course, good equipment from NIkon, Monolta, Sony, etc. that I am not qualified to comment on because I do not use them, nor have I ever had the occassion to use any of them.

As far as the raw vs. jpeg argument (why shoot one or the other - which one is better, etc...), this is one that has been going on for years in the digital photography world and you will get quite a variety of opinions. To start with, have a look at this URL and see if this helps.

http://www.photoxels.com/tutorial_raw.html

If you still have any questions, then post back to this thread and someone will undoubtedly answer. Basically RAW is an unprocessed file and you will most likely need to edit it in a program such as Lightroom or Photoshop Elements (there are others) and a JPEG has been processed to some extent inside the camera and is often "good to go" as a proof or even a final copy if it is a simple landscape or portrait image (I will get flack for that statement - but this is my experience.). Most Point & Shoot cameras shoot only in jpeg format. The RAW image gives you a lot more ability to "improve" the image in Post-Processing (PP) than does the jpeg. e.g., you can adjust the White Balance for a raw capture, whereas you can do very little with it if your image is a jpeg. JPEGs are compressed files and every time you open it and then save it, you lose a little bit of the "data" in the image, unlike other image formats including raw. That is why jpeg is sometimes referred to as a"lossy" format. I could go on, but check the site noted here and, if you still have questions - come back as I said.

Hope this helps, a bit...

Cheers,

WesternGuy

[Jennifer_Nathe]

Thank you soo much that really helps a lot. I love canons too but I ended up finding a very good deal on a Nikon d3100 kit and I get some free lessons on photography as well. So I really hope I made the right decision. Either way it is a very Big step up for me from the Canon Powershot A620, and I have a lot of learning to do.....Also any advice on learning more about photography would be greatly appreciated. I really need help understanding how to adjust my camera for different lighting, and also I need help with understanding the full depth of camera settings....Thanks again

[WesternGuy]

Jennifer, sounds like a good choice - hope you have fun with it. As far as digital photography goes, you might like to get the latest copy of "Digital Photography for Dummies", whatever the latest edition number is. Don't laugh...:thumbsup: ...when I started in digital photography about 5-6 years ago, my wife bought me a copy and it was well worth it - gave me some great insight into the various aspects of digital photography. Once you have ploughed through that one, then you might have a look at "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson, I believe that the latest edition is the 3rd edition. It may be a little technical in places, but if you have questions then post back here to the appropriate sub-forum and you will get some ideas and thoughts from people. The other ones I would recommend because they are more about the aesthetic and creative aspects of photography are any of the books by Freeman Patterson (Google him, or search on Amazon). Some of them he has co-authors on them, but they were great for me around the whole aspect of learning how to see - creatively - when I am taking photos - gave me a whole new outlook on things. The sky is the limit...

Then, depending on the type of photography that you want to do, buy a book or two on that type of photography - different authors will give you different ideas - for sure. If you get into nature photography, as I am, then I would highly recommend a recent book by Chris Weston, entitle "Nature Photography - Insider secrets from the World's top Digital Photography Professionals" It sort of reads like "the seven habits of taking good pictures". Again, for landscape photography look at the works of people like Eliot Porter, George Weston and Ansel Adams - some can be found by searching the web, other from books that have been published posthumously, for example, Eliot Porter was the one who introduced colour to landscape photography, and, of course, Ansel Adams was the father of landscape photography (my opinion) and one of the best darkroom mechanics when it came to "tweaking" black and white images. You will probably find your own "heroes" for the type of photography that you like to do...

You said, I really need help understanding how to adjust my camera for different lighting, and also I need help with understanding the full depth of camera settings...you will get some of that info from the "Dummies" book, but do not neglect your users manual. You can also check this out as well - http://my.safaribooksonline.com/book/-/9780470648650... hope this helps.



Cheers,

WesternGuy

[n8]

This thread (thats a link you can click on) is a real quick example of what shooting in RAW can do for you. The first image was how it looked at the moment and what the "final" jpeg did. The second was with the fill light slider in Adobe Camera Raw cranked. One of the biggest benefits of shooting in raw to me is the amount of latitude you get in your exposure, which means that you can really get away with making an image darker or lighter while still keeping the details. The down side of this is that the size of an uncompressed 16mp raw image is HUGE and will fill up your sd card real quick. The process of learning how to process raw files can also be intimidating, but once you get a basic understanding it really unlocks what you can produce.

[Anbesol]

When people talk about raw, its a lot of 'opinion' stuff, which ones better, for what and why. But, there are simple factual differences between raw and JPEG.

Raw is uncompressed, all the colors reproduced as shot. 12-14 bit color range, instead of 8-bit - allowing softer, more subtle graduations. Adjustable white balance in raw conversion. All in all larger reproduction quality. Uses a lot of storage space, takes much longer to process (difference is mittigated in very new computers, being pretty damn fast on everything).

JPEG is an 8-bit compressed file format, but when you put your camera on super fine or extra fine (depending on brand) it actually does very little compression. The file sizes are a fraction the size of raw.

*edit - oh, westernguy posted a link already...

[TomBrooklyn]

RAW could be thought of as being like a negative is to film, a digital negative if you will. jpeg is a file in which the negative has been processed so you can see the image.

The processing procedure involves making decisions about image parameters that lock in or reduce the ability to later change those parameters. Those parameters include such things as exposure, white balance, tonality, color saturation, highlight and shadow detail, etc.

After this processing, a jpeg is compressed so the file takes up less space. This compression eliminates some of the file details. That is why changes to the image become limited compared to what is possible with the original RAW file.

Advantages of RAW

- Contains all the image information.
- Maximum ability to process the image to your own specifications or tastes
- Maximum ability to correct or adjust White Balance, Exposure, Color Saturation, Hue, Luminance, Sharpness, Contrast, and Noise Reduction; and to recover highlight and shadow details, etc.
- You're not stuck with suboptimal or undesired processing decisions made by the camera.
- You can process the photo different ways for different looks, and maintain maximum quality in each version.
- Particularly difficult captures in terms of exposure, dynamic range, and noise reduction etc. can be custom processed to retrieve and retain the best quality.

Disadvantages of RAW

- Files take up more space. Adds to file storage costs.
- Requires dedicated software to read, view, and process the file (typically provided free from camera mfg)
- Requires time and effort to make desired adjustments to images.
- Requires thought about image qualities that could be left up to the camera "firmware" and it's internal computer to decide for you. Most cameras do a decent to very good job with most images in good light.
- RAW capable cameras generally cost more than jpeg cameras.
- RAW images take longer for a camera to write to the memory card. This might be an issue if shooting a lot of photos in burst mode. Refer to your camera's specifications.

Generally, most professionals and serious enthusiasts prefer RAW, and most casual shooters prefer jpeg.

[OldClicker]

Generally, most professionals and serious enthusiasts prefer RAW, and most casual shooters prefer jpeg.

I have found that a larger peercentage of pros use jpg than do DSLR amateurs do to the huge number of shots they need to process - Terry.