Why RAW??

[steady]

Forgive me is I ask the same question as others,

What are the advantages of taking photos in RAW format? I have not read the books deeply yet, but wonder why I need to do it in the future? Can you tell me the top reasons or advantages over the JPEG files?

Thank you.

[Peter_AUS]

RAW is the equivalent of a negative. No processing of the image in camera, you adjust using a RAW converting software, such as Adobe Capture RAW in Photoshop 7 or CS, Capture One software, Breezebrowser just to name a few.

The files certainly are bigger, but you get a lot more adjustment control than you do with JPEG files.

[Asylum Steve]

Peter's right on with his reply, although comparing RAW files to exposed but undeveloped film would a more accurate analogy.

And, if for no other reason, jpegs are limited to 8-bit files in photoshop (sure they can be converted to higher, but you've already lost much of the information), whereas RAW files can be opened as 16-bit files out of the camera, a significant difference in editable image information.

Still, as we've discussed here often, many shooters can work quite nicely with jpeg files, and for a lot of types of images, a high quality jpeg photo will look and print just fine.

You have to decide for yourself whether RAW files are better for your workflow, and whether having to go to the extra effort of dealing with them is worth it...

[Trevor Ash]

Peter mentioned it but he wasn't very specific about one thing that is important to me and is why I shoot RAW. It's easier to change the color temperature of an image post shot with RAW than it is shooting jpg. Worlds easier!!!

That and 16 bit are the two reasons why I shoot RAW over jpeg.

The biggest disadvantages are that the files are larger (which means you need more memory cards, takes longer to read/write/transfer, etc) and that they must be processed afterwards with some sort of software. If you have a really slow computer or no fancy RAW applications then it'll be painfully slow.

[another view]

I don't use RAW that much, but the higher bit depth is nice to have with low contrast shots. Problem is, if you move the black and/or white points in you'll wind up with a histogram that looks like a picket fence. This can mean that your print will show an edge between two similar colors (like in a clear blue sky) but a higher bit depth makes this less of a problem - it's closer to continuous tone.

[Arctirus]

I just tried raw for the first time last night. I downloaded canon's latest raw plugin for photoshop and shot a photo both in raw and jpeg. I'm guessing I am doing something wrong because my jpeg turned out much better. The raw was very lacking in color saturation. I'm guessing there is something I'm supposed to in photoshop for this so I used extensis intellihance (basically an improved version of auto levels) on the raw which did settle those issues but after doing the same to the jpeg I still liked it slightly better. Any advice?

[Trevor Ash]

Any advice?

Shoot using the method that gives you the best results. As you've already indicated, you like the jpeg better so go with that! Being happy with the end result is much more important that the process for things like this.

[Arctirus]

Well I ask because I assume I'm doing something wrong with raw. When I say the raw file is lacking saturation I REALLY mean it, It's close to black and white.

[Trevor Ash]

Well I ask because I assume I'm doing something wrong with raw. When I say the raw file is lacking saturation I REALLY mean it, It's close to black and white.

Oh! Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Would you be up to starting a new thread about your problem? Be sure to attach example photos that show the problem. I haven't heard of anything like that before.

[Arctirus]

Sure, I can do that. I'll take some and post in the next day or two.

[hellinvader]

since RAW is a unprocess file, and jpg is a processed file. your camera fixed da saturation , white balanced and colour adjesment right after the pic is taken, that's y its more colourful. RAW is just like unprocessed film, u still have to develope it thru photoshop or wutever software u use, similar to film neg. needs filteration when enlarging it thru enlargers (i hope u know wut i mean, since not every1 know darkroom stuff).