RAW vs JPEG for beginner?

sheepman

Hi there. I'm pretty new to photography and I've read quite a few articles on Photography 101. A lot of bloggers suggest shooting in RAW format due to the level of detail you can use in your post-processing/editing. I have a copy of Lightroom but I'm unsure if I need that level of detail RAW offers while starting out.

What are your suggestions? Should I keep shooting in RAW+JPEG or just shoot in high-quality JPEG?

Splinters

Its fairly simple, RAW files are infinitely more flexible and will allow a lot more editing possibilities (recovering far more detail from shadows/highlights etc). They provide editing possibilities that simply aren't possible with jpegs.

The flipside is it typically means more work. If you find yourself editing your shots quite a lot then RAW is 100% the way to go. If you don't typically do much to your shots then RAW may not be right for you and you'll be just as happy with jpeg. Ultimately it comes down to using whatever works best for you.

sheepman

Got it, thanks for the info. I'll try out RAW at the beginning and see how much editing I end up doing.

Silva360

Even if you don't want to bother with editing at this point in time, you should shoot RAW files in addition to your jpegs. Once you narrow down any particular photo shoot, to say 1 or 2 keepers, then just save those 1 or 2 RAW files and store them somewhere. The point is, once you develop in photography you will want to start editing and there may be some superb shots that you wish you could revisit. I make a point of saying a 1 or 2 (or maybe a couple more) because if you store all your RAW files you will need to be prepared to buy lots of external storage!

sheepman

@Silva360 -- thanks! I've tried to avoid the RAW+JPEG combo as I'm stuck with an 8GB memory card, I spent a lot of money on the camera and lens. I'm not taking a lot of photos at the moment though, so I'll try this out.

Myksyk

I'd advise to shoot RAW. Get familiar with Lightroom of course (I'd recommend Phil Steele's introductory course). It's such a simple application really and you can get so much more from your images with just a few minutes work. And at least YOU'RE deciding what your photo should look like rather than the algorithms in your camera.

pwllor

No point in shooting jpegs these days, especially than the size of raws is not really an issue.

But if you learn quicker shooting raws or jpegs, is a different story.

the_syco

Shoot RAW.

One main reason is that it'll have all the data on it. Time of day, speed of the shutter, the F setting, your ISO, etc. Great when you look at a shot, and want to know exactly how you took it. Depending on the camera, some of them even have the GPS coordinates. So if you come back to some deadly photo, you'll have where you took the photo, when you took the photo, and this will allow you to retake the same photo, but with some new trick you've learnt.

I never shot JPEG, so dunno if this info is also in the jpeg.

But RAW will also allow you to mess with the photo at a later date, as once you take a photo, you may never be able to retake it again.

Kenny Logins

the_syco wrote: »

I never shot JPEG, so dunno if this info is also in the jpeg.

Most of it is stored in JPEG too.

The RAW image is 12-14 bit compared to JPEG's 8 bit. That's the difference.

sheepman

Thanks everyone for the feedback, it seems the decision is unanimously RAW

Kenny Logins

sheepman wrote: »

Thanks everyone for the feedback, it seems the decision is unanimously RAW

Don't be surprised if your photos look a little dull or flat when using RAW. JPEGs are processed automatically with whatever settings are in the camera, often with sharpness, noise reduction, saturation and contrast bumps. With RAW, you have to do this yourself.

CabanSail

The easy analogy of what this means is if you remember when we all shot film. You would take a roll of film to be processed and printed. You got back a set of Prints and the Negatives. The Prints would usually be auto corrected when passed through the Mini-Lab. If you wanted a reprint you would take along the Negative, as it was the original source. A skilled technician in a darkroom could produce a far superior print when they processed it as there is all the detail available and faults could be corrected.

The RAW file has all the data from your sensor with very little done with it. It will be flat (personally I would like it to be flatter, but that's another story) You then create a photo from this data. There are many ways to do that. Many like Lightroom as it is easy (personally I really dislike it). I prefer to use Photoshop but there is more of a learning curve to use that.

The RAW + JPEG is useful to begin. Most here would never shoot JPEG anymore. Some shoot Analogue RAW.

OldGoat

I'm out of step with most here in that I find myself moving back towards jpeg. Over the last year or so I've been shooting RAW & jpg. 90% of my shots just get a little bit of cropping or lens correction, the remaining 10% go with me into Photoshop for detailed playing around.

I found that the majority of shots, the run of the mill shots that I seem to end up with just get a token bit of contrast boost, a bit of sharpening, a bit of saturation tweeking...you know, the kind of stuff that jpeg does for me automatically. So if I'm happy enough with the minor jpeg tweeks why would I bother wasting time on those images when I have my real keepers to work on.

I suggest that you keep shooting in both formats for now. Look at the jpg, play with the RAW files on any images you think might benefit but don't end up using RAW editing just to produce something that you camera can already for you.

/Blasphemy

Splinters

As much as Im a fan of RAW for my own workflow Id totally agree with OldGoat.

Shooting RAW is amazing if you need the benefit of that extra dynamic range but not everybody does. Genuinely one of the best photographers that I'm aware of in Ireland, a guy who does some extremely high end polished work for a number of large commercial businesses and publications only shoots in jpeg. This guy is super particular about getting it right in camera so doesn't need the editing latitude that RAW provides.

To be honest I wouldnt do it myself, but it definitely is possible to shoot some extremely high end and professional work only using jpeg.

sheepman

Thank you all for the feedback, this place is a goldmine for beginners like me I had been shooting RAW+JPEG for a while but I still haven't bought a larger memory card, which is why I wanted to see if it was worthwhile for a new photographer to shoot in RAW. I'll experiment with the RAW images in Lightroom and see if there are major improvements compared to the JPEG.

Splinters

If memory cards are the issue take a look at memoryc.com (Im in no way associated with them btw).

I've got a few few cards from them and they're amazingly well priced.

sheepman

Splinters wrote: »

If memory cards are the issue take a look at memoryc.com (Im in no way associated with them btw).

I've got a few few cards from them and they're amazingly well priced.

I'll take a look, thanks.

Drift

Does anyone here use an alternative to Lightroom?

I would like to have a go at processing my own JPEGs rather than allowing Nikon to do it. But I would like to do it in bulk rather than one by one with Photoshop and I don't want to splash out on Lightroom yet!

OldGoat

Photoshop (with Bridge and ACR) can do all your bulk work.* Global changes can be made to all your files in a single pass.

I found that Lightroom is just a pretty front end for chunks of Photoshop tbh. All in all I'd rather have the extra functionality of Photoshop over the ease of use of Lightroom.


*NOTE: I'm a curmudgeonly oul fecker who refuses to upgrade to PhotoshopCC stuff and still potters along with CS5.5. If it ain't broke...

Drift

I only have CS4 ..... Hope that can do the same!!!

Kenny Logins

Drift wrote: »

Does anyone here use an alternative to Lightroom?

I would like to have a go at processing my own JPEGs rather than allowing Nikon to do it. But I would like to do it in bulk rather than one by one with Photoshop and I don't want to splash out on Lightroom yet!

Darktable for OSX (or Linux?)

http://www.darktable.org/

Or check the software that came with the camera, ViewNX can process RAW files. http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/software/viewnx2/

Drift

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Darktable for OSX (or Linux?)

http://www.darktable.org/

Or check the software that came with the camera, ViewNX can process RAW files. http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/software/viewnx2/

Thanks a mill. Have a dual boot machine with OS X but work means that I spent almost all my time on Windows 7 these days.

I'm going to give CS4 and Bridge a go first and failing that I might try ViewNX.

Kenny Logins

Drift wrote: »

Thanks a mill. Have a dual boot machine with OS X but work means that I spent almost all my time on Windows 7 these days.

I'm going to give CS4 and Bridge a go first and failing that I might try ViewNX.

Check your NEF (Nikon RAW) version against the Adobe Camera Raw version required here - https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/kb/camera-raw-plug-supported-cameras.html

Drift

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Check your NEF (Nikon RAW) version against the Adobe Camera Raw version required here - https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/kb/camera-raw-plug-supported-cameras.html

Thanks! Looks like I'm OK. Luckily I have a fairly old camera (D90) too.

CabanSail

Lightroom is the same engine as Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) with the cataloging stuffed added.

You can automate PhotoShop to process images amazingly quickly. I used to create Droplets to access the Actions but now I use Image Processor.

Workflow is;

Open all images in ACR and change the process back from the current setting (2012 I think?) to the one before (2010?)

Set Black Point to Zero. (if it's not defaulted there)

Start sorting images using stars and do the ACR edits. That is Exposure and Temperature. Stars are given for keepers and the level of Dynamic Range adjustment needed.

Run Image Processor in batches selecting the appropriate Action set. Save as PSD and maybe JPEG for quick jobs.

Do other stuff while it does the work. Come back later and re-work some images which need it.