Jump to: site navigation, content.

Local stuff that matters to you.
Did you know about Johnny Lloyd Rollinsplaying at City Tavern this Saturday?
News & events for
Thursday, December
10

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Wild Art: Photos of the Alliance Air Show, Swirll Winery and pics around town

Also, what the heck is RAW, and what's the difference between RAW and jpeg? And why is RAW always in all caps, it's kind of annoying.

This week we have more pics from around D/FW, a few shots of the Alliance Air Show and Swirll Winery. There is also an awesome photo of the Old Red Museum that makes it almost haunted (insert scary ghost sounds... wooooooohhhhhh). All images were submitted by our Pegasus News Flickr community.

Tips and Tricks

This week: RAW vs JPEG. A user mentioned in a caption that they had no idea what the difference between a RAW image and a regular jpg is. This is a pretty common question and I will do my best to explain the difference, and help you decide which is best to use. RAW is a format that is uncompressed or compressed but lossless. A JPEG is a compressed image, which results in some loss of the data (aka, it's "lossy." Yes, that is a technical term). Technically, that is the difference, but here is really what you need to know before making your decision on which to use.

The Pros

  • With a RAW file you retain the maximum image detail. This is why they call it "lossless," because you retain everything possible to your camera's maximum capabilities.
  • This is the biggie: you can make your adjustments with more precision and a minimal effect to the quality of the image. Everyone has tried to pull an amazing photo out of a shitty lighting situation in photoshop, and it pretty much never works without looking super "photoshopped." When shooting in RAW, you basically have a larger margin of error. You can bring out a dark photo without it looking as pixelated or you can bring down highlights a little better without looking gray and splotchy (to name a few examples).
  • Less posterization. We all know what this is, but didn't realize it actually had a word. It's when you want your image really contrasty, and suddenly all these shades of red show up when you didn't realize there were reds in that part of the image and the whole thing just looks... digitalized, eek. Wikidpedia explains it better.

The Cons

  • You don't get something for nothing. All that fantastic extra detail comes with a price. RAW files are ginormous, two to three times larger than a jpg, which means less images will fit on a card. This also means the write speed is slower. Depending on your camera, the slower write speed can be almost debilitating (like it was with my 10D).
  • With a RAW file, processing is a requirement. Almost nothing will recognize a RAW file except the software to process it. There is no sending a RAW file to your friends who aren't camera buffs. You can't just shoot and upload and send right away. This means a slower turnaround time because every image has to be converted to another file type. And you know how it is, once you're already in Photoshop you can't just not start making adjustments...
  • There is not a standard format for RAW files, meaning most cameras have a different one. Canon uses .CR2 files now, but they used to use .CRW. This means more software and software updates and frustration when you buy a new camera and the nice, cheap editing software you use doesn't work with the damn files anymore. Why Nikon and Canon and everyone else doesn't just pick one, well, I'm not tech savvy enough to tell you.

So now, which to choose? I say play around a little with RAW on photos that are not important (don't try it at your grandmother's 80th birthday party) and see if you like it. Most people don't shoot only RAW, because it's not always practical. Even professionals shoot in jpeg quite often. Imagine editing 1,000 wedding reception photos and having to convert them to a jpeg one at a time. (I have actually accidentally shot a wedding reception all in RAW. It was horrible.) The point here is to take into consideration every situation. Here is another good article to skim that also offers some software suggestions. A good rule of thumb I use is if the lighting is horrible, I shoot RAW. If it's something I possibly want to make poster sized: RAW. If it's sports or I need speed either while shooting, or I'm on a time crunch: jpg all the way. If you're shooting sports at night, well, good luck with that. As always, if you have any further questions or suggestions, do not hestiate to drop me a line.

This is an unadjusted jpg photo.

Photo by Laura Seewoester

This is an unadjusted jpg photo.
This is an unadjusted RAW photo. Notice how the jpg is a little more saturated and contrasty. While I personally would still want make adjustments, the jpg is still definitely an acceptable image.

Photo by Laura Seewoester

This is an unadjusted RAW photo. Notice how the jpg is a little more saturated and contrasty. While I personally would still want make adjustments, the jpg is still definitely an acceptable image.
Here is a jpg with Adobe Photoshop auto correct.

Photo by Laura Seewoester

Here is a jpg with Adobe Photoshop auto correct.
This is the RAW image with auto correct.  Obviously the RAW image in this case is a little less contrasty and a bit softer with a more refined detail.

Photo by Laura Seewoester

This is the RAW image with auto correct. Obviously the RAW image in this case is a little less contrasty and a bit softer with a more refined detail.


  • Staff
  • Verified User
  • Anonymous

Jason Rice, says:

::If you're shooting sports at night, well, good luck with that.

How 'bout theater? It's about the same. Low light, fast motion. Any pointers you know of? (Saw a nice little "low light" article on your link to dps - thanks) Love these little tuts, btw.

Verified

1 year, 1 month ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

alexander troup, says:

Well this is another 21 event, and I will catch a cab and get on out there, then again, Jason has given this some good pointers, anything that gets people out is my ticket, and so lets wait and see, keep up the focal point Jason, ....A.T, second observer.

Verified

1 year, 1 month ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Laura Seewoester, says:

As far as shooting in theaters all I can say is that shooting in RAW can help with the noise that often comes with using a high ISO. You can reduce the noise a little better without the image looking too terribly soft and muddled.

Aside from that, you can buy a new lens. I know everyone loves a good zoom on their lens, but a fixed 50mm lens with a low f-stop (1.8 or 1.4) is worth the money and makes a world of difference. And the 1.8 lens (at least for Canon) should be under $200. It's a cheapo though so don't drop it. The faster lenses are also useful when shooting concerts (although it helps to be in closer up, yay press pit). While I always get a bit of lens envy standing next to the other photogs with long lenses, I stick to my little 50 and my photos come out just as nice imo.

Verified

1 year, 1 month ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

John Meyer, says:

<p>The benefits of RAW are so profound that - once you start using it in your workflow - you will likely never go back to shooting .jpgs.</p>

<p>The exception to this is where speed of processing enters into the equation, such as a wedding shoot (as Laura mentioned).</p>

<p>The real beauty of RAW is that you can make all your adjustments to the image - INCLUDING WHITE BALANCE - after the file is recorded to the card, without any degradation of image quality.</p>

<p>And with the price of flash cards dropping like the Dow Jones average, file size is only an issue when you reach the processing stage (i.e., you'll need a lot of RAM and a fast processor on your computer).</p>

<p>If you're shooting <a href="http://www.johnpmeyer.smugmug.com/">landscapes and fine art</a>, or small numbers of images at an interview, for instance, there's simply no reason to shoot .jpg's if RAW is an option.</p>

Staff

1 year, 1 month ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Laura Seewoester, says:

This just in: I got a <a href="http://www.rawworkflow.com/instant-jpeg-from-raw-utility/">download</a> today that helps enormously with RAW workflow. (Thank you <a href="http://www.pegasusnews.com/users/davidg/">David</a>) It instantly pulls jpgs from all your RAW files. And it's free (we like free). If you shoot in RAW + JPG this will be your best friend and will save you a bunch of card space.

All you do is register and you will get the link to download it. Then follow the instructions in the Read Me file and try it out. It's like magic!

Verified

1 year, 1 month ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

John Meyer, says:

<p>Aargh. While this sounds good, some of the virtue of working from RAW involves the control one can exert over the RAW conversion process - for instance, tweaking the exposure or white balance.</p>

<p>Having a utility that automatically does the conversion to .jpg negates this powerful creative process.</p>

<p>Where this utility WILL prove useful (and I intend to try it out - thanks, Laura! And David.) will be for quick-and-dirty access to one's images for shooting off to friends, prior to doing the careful conversion work at a later time.</p>

Staff

1 year, 1 month ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

What do you think?

:

:

Email Print 6 Comments Contribute

See more stories in:


Quantcast