Difference between Jpeg vs. RAW explained

[Every Miles A Memory]

This video explains why you should always be shooting in RAW capture over Jpeg. So many people ask why we only shoot in RAW and if it really makes that much of a difference.... Watch This Video

[video]http://www.video2brain.com/en/videos-11873.htm[/video]

 

[targa88]

Pat,
Interesting pizza analogy!

Not discounting the merits of RAW vs JPEG... just seems like there is a fair amount of extra work/manipulation involved with RAW.

Proportionately how many cameras shoot RAW vs JPEG might also have something to do with it...

I am sure that those with more experience will chime in

 

[Lost Canadian]

I have no idea what he was said, I couldn't get past the pizza. Anyone else hungry after watching that?:chef:

 

[Every Miles A Memory]

I have no idea what he was said, I couldn't get past the pizza. Anyone else hungry after watching that?:chef:

Cindy watched it and said the exact same thing. "I cant even pay attention to what he's saying, I'm too hungry"...LOL Good to know you both have a more powerful stomach than anything else

 

[DiploStrat]

Not discounting the merits of RAW vs JPEG... just seems like there is a fair amount of extra work/manipulation involved with RAW.

This was certainly true a few years ago, when the workflow went something like this: Shoot>Batch convert RAW to TIFF(or worse, JPEG)>Edit (with a pixel editor like Photoshop.

With new tools like Aperture or Lightroom the workflow goes more like this: Shoot>Edit>Done. In fact, you never need to convert to TIFF or JPEG unless you are giving the file to someone.

One dirty secret: a good JPEG can be "perfect". In fact, many print programs only print JPEG. The question is how you GET to that "perfect" JPEG. If you start with a 12+ bit RAW, then you have much, much more scope for the correction of any exposure errors, color casts, etc. Start with an 8 bit JPEG and your corrections risk to be much more evident.

This is, of course, over simplified, but I hope it is helpful.

 

[4xdog]

I don't think I buy it.

I see RAW vs jpeg as sorta like chosing to buy 2-for-1 extra large take-and-bake pizzas every time just because you get so much more pie, when I don't really want that much pizza, and I certainly don't feel like cooking it every time.

Many times I just want a slice or two. And I have other stuff to do than cook the half-baked pie before eating it.

Sure, RAW has its place. But in my world, so does jpeg.

Don

 

[goodtimes]

I don't think I buy it.

I see RAW vs jpeg as sorta like chosing to buy 2-for-1 extra large take-and-bake pizzas every time just because you get so much more pie, when I don't really want that much pizza, and I certainly don't feel like cooking it every time.

Many times I just want a slice or two. And I have other stuff to do than cook the half-baked pie before eating it.

Sure, RAW has its place. But in my world, so does jpeg.

Don

For the average person (not to be confused with the average photographer), I agree. RAW is simply overkill if you are taking a few snapshots of the family reunion to put up on facebook or photo-bucket. But, if you are going to be post-processing images anyway - RAW gives you a lot more to work with.

About the only time I question the usefulness of RAW is when someone either:
A) is not interested in post-processing the images
B) has to buy new equipment that would otherwise not be purchased.

 

[Warn Industries]

Thanks for posting this. Interesting analogy, I agree. The Art Director and I have been recently talking about this exact subject (I sent it on to him).

- Andy

 

[ywen]

Many high-end wedding photographers shoot in JPEG mode. If you are good with exposure, then JPEG will be fine.. the extra stops you can achieve by processing the RAW is nice but not necessary for a successful image. If you're competing in a photo contest where the number of stops is a merit point then you should shoot in RAW. LOL.

I shoot RAW when doing events mostly for the benefit of being able to adjust my white balance in post. I shoot in various lighting environments over a short period of time and do not have time to get the WB spot on consistently..

 

[goodtimes]

I shoot RAW when doing events mostly for the benefit of being able to adjust my white balance in post. I shoot in various lighting environments over a short period of time and do not have time to get the WB spot on consistently..

Ha! I don't even try to set my WB. I do it all in post.

Of course, I'm just a hack with a cheap outdated camera. :gunt:

 

[Every Miles A Memory]

Ha! I don't even try to set my WB. I do it all in post.

I havent taken my camera off of Auto-White Balance since I bought it. I remember back when I used to know what all those different white balances meant for different scenes, but like you, I do all that now in Post.

The only time we shoot in Jpeg is when we're shooting sporting events and have the cameras set to their highest frame rates. I dont really want to look through thousands of RAW images after a weekend at the Rodeo and most of the cowboys never order anything larger than a 8x10 print

 

[Lost Canadian]

I typically set white balance in the field during challenging lighting conditions like twilight hours. Reason I do is because white balance affects colour channels and metering to some extent. If the auto white balance is too warm it can shift colours which may not show clipping in the blue channels and if it chooses too cool a white balance it may not show clipping in the red. Setting the white balance is important for me to ensure I get an optimal exposure during those times, and it's easy enough to do. I use a colorchecker passport to set and tweek white balance.

 

[goodtimes]

I typically set white balance in the field during challenging lighting conditions like twilight hours. Reason I do is because white balance affects colour channels and metering to some extent. If the auto white balance is too warm it can shift colours which may not show clipping in the blue channels and if it chooses too cool a white balance it may not show clipping in the red. Setting the white balance is important for me to ensure I get an optimal exposure during those times, and it's easy enough to do. I use a colorchecker passport to set and tweek white balance.

All that stuff that you wrote up there ^^^^, is why I'm a hack with an outdated camera.

 

[Carolyn]

With a camera set to jpg... the camera is doing the editing. Including contrast/colour/sharpening etc...

In RAW, your camera simply collects all the data, but does no editing in camera. It is a *digital negative*. That you then take into the *darkroom* and process, then print.

Which is best? Depends. As mentioned above... for snapshots, jpg's shot from a decent point and shoot are great. For many web applications (show and tell) they are great. And printed to 5x7 or there-a-bouts (is that a word?) Will do wonderfully. Even larger, depending on your viewing distance. IE: the further back you stand, the more acceptable a large print from jpg files or point and shoot cameras that don't have powerful processors... become.

For many applications, jpg's are just fine. Many folks never need more. And thinking you do is silly. Who wants to spend time in post if your goal is accomplished with a jpg?

Another thing... just because one chooses to shoot in raw doesn't mean one is going to do a lot of post processing. For example, I try to *get it right in camera*... then open in a RAW editor. I basically just dodge and burn (darkroom techniques for adjusting contrast) then resize if needed, sharpen and print. *Straight* digital photography. Other folks are wizards in post, and create artistic digital art. Different strokes for different folks. On a typical days outing, I may only make 1-5 exposures... sometimes more. Sometimes none.

JPG's don't stand up well to much post processing, but give you an acceptable (or better) photograph.

RAW files on the other hand, have a lot more latitude for post, and will give you the best possible image (assuming you've nailed your exposure and aren't relying on post processing to make your image *better* )

Always try to make your photograph as good as possible at the time of capture (exposure/composition/focus)... and have fun shooting :sombrero:

Oh... one more thing... slow down a bit, don't *spray and pray* - take your time, check all around the corners and sides, making sure you have everything you want in the photograph, and nothing you don't want... and exception would be sports or street photography when motor drive is your friend.

Hope this helps a bit :ylsmoke:

 

[Darren]

It's always been amazing to me how the photo industry and its users can butcher a simple three-letter word. Raw is not an acronym or file format, and should not be capitalized as such; it is merely the common word that describes the format, meaning the original, unaltered state. Even most big-name companies, including camera manufacturers, get it wrong; Adobe is the one of the only ones who do it right. However, in the days of massive careless spelling, I know it's a longshot to ever see this corrected in the mainstream.