A&P JPEG vs Unedited RAW v.ohaiimanoob

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Smeghead, Oct 19, 2008.

  1. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
    JPEG vs Unedited RAW v.ohayimanoob

    Does JPEG look better since it's pp'd by default while the united raw isn't? I'm talking about just converting the raw to JPEG without doing any editing.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2008
  2. ericande

    ericande Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    It depends on your conversion. When you convert to jpg from raw you ARE editing unless you just leave all the defaults on. Which is dumb in most cases.
     
  3. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
    Yeah I've never done it. I don't see any point with taken pics in RAW if you're going to edit them. But I'm just curious if they would still be better.
     
  4. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    There is no point. Shoot JPEG small so you don't have to do anything before you upload them to your myspace.
     
  5. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
  6. mikeskillz

    mikeskillz New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2006
    Messages:
    5,753
    Likes Received:
    0
    the colors will look a bit better, and maybe slightly sharper? the point of raw is it saves all of the data it needs to make the final jpeg incase you want to change the colors or use some shadow/highlights that jpeg creation would otherwise discard.
     
  7. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,737
    Likes Received:
    55
    best answer evar.

    /thread.
     
  8. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    I personally feel that converted RAW files look better than their camera-JPG counterparts. I say this after shooting camera-JPG for years and then finally switching halfway through owning the MkIII. The converted MkIII JPG files looked much clearer and had less noise than the camera JPGs did IMO.
     
  9. Drunken Karnie Midget

    Drunken Karnie Midget In Yeo We Trust, All Others Pay Cash OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    39,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dirty Canada
    :werd: After having started shooting in RAW only, i've noticed the difference in photochop after going back and processing some camera .jpgs id taken before i knew about raw... i've noticed a distinct difference. The camera jpgs were severely pixelated at the edges, while the converted RAW files were still crisp smooth edges, even when heavily zoomed in. Camera jpg does some vicious compression, and you loose a lot of information that you could otherwise work with.
     
  10. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,737
    Likes Received:
    55

    everyone comes around eventually....

    ;)
     
  11. Drunken Karnie Midget

    Drunken Karnie Midget In Yeo We Trust, All Others Pay Cash OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    39,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dirty Canada
    Someone in here was posting a few days/weeks ago, and had mentioned "if you're shooting in jpeg only (kill yourself) blah blah blah" I decided to give it a try and see what's up with that... i'm never going back.
     
  12. MTech

    MTech New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,862
    Likes Received:
    0
    So what kinda storage are you working with if all you shoot is RAW?? Or do you guys not shoot much than?
     
  13. Drunken Karnie Midget

    Drunken Karnie Midget In Yeo We Trust, All Others Pay Cash OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    39,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dirty Canada
    At the moment, i've only got 1 2Gb card, though i'll get more as soon as i can spare the scratch. As far as permanent storage, i just delete all the shit files. Useless, skull-fuckingly boring, camera shake, etc. My recommendation, get larger cards. if you want you can shoot raw+jpg, but that's even more storage. It's gonna be a balancing act over what you value more, Getting ALL your camera is capable of, or having more space to fill. I can store about half as many RAW shots as i can jpg, but when it comes to PP, it's worth it. i can do more, without glaring obvious signs of alteration. The choice is yours.
     
  14. someonenew

    someonenew He's Dangerous

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    104,681
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    buy multiple cards and don't worry about it:dunno:

    with the cost of cards there's no reason to not have multiple cards in your gear bag. If 1 card doesn't hold enough buy 2, if that's not enough buy 3...etc:o
     
  15. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,737
    Likes Received:
    55
    storage is the cheapest part of digital photography....
     
  16. wizeguy4

    wizeguy4 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allentown, PA
    I will only delete test shots, to check for white balance and blowouts. After that, I will then only delete items that are out of focus or horribly timed. I have found that sometimes hidden int he picture os something I think was a bad shot hides a different image I was not going for that just needs cropping. so for fear of losing these, I save them all till I can get them to a monitor to have a better look.

    and witht he sandisc rebate always going on, last week Circuit city had the 4gb ex 3 for 47 after tax and 60 buck visa card with the purchase of 3 with rebate making the final cost like 80 bucks for (3) 4gb cards
     
  17. someonenew

    someonenew He's Dangerous

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    104,681
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    a buddy of mine who does wedding photography started me on the "never delete anything" kick. His theory is this...your shot might not be perfect right now, but what's to say you didn't capture a moment that turns out to be something the client really wants. A good example he uses is that he caught an image of a bride's grandfather. The image was a little blurry (the grandfather was not the focus of the image) but he was crying in the image. It turns out the grandfather died a week after the wedding. The image was the last image ever captured of the grandfather. Bride bought a HUGE print of it because of this. :hs:
     
  18. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Currently, I have 3x 4GB CF and 2x 2GB CF cards. Im going to get a couple 8GB UDMA cards when I get the 5DII though. Ill probably give the 2GB cards to someone local who could use them.

    As far as storing on my PC; I try to weed out any shots that I dont think I would do something with later. If Im not going to do anything with it, theres not much point in keeping the RAW file hanging around taking up space.

    Fortunately, I still have space internally but when I need more Ill just get a WB external drive.
     

Share This Page