[newton]

Anyone shoot in RAW format here? I was wondering what were the ups and downs of shooting in RAW were. Is post processing hard?

I have two RAW modes, RAW and RAW + L. Not sure which to use. For the moment I'm shooting in Fine L (jpeg).

 

[SDSilverM3]

I shoot RAW exclusively. The advantages outweigh the disadvantages by far. RAW allows you to not worry about white balance since you can adjust later in Photoshop along with the ability to adjust exposure, contrast, and saturation settings with no compression loss. You can do more to the RAW pictures in Photoshop before you start seeing deterioration like you would in JPEG. Use the Sharpen feature as an example. Do it 3x to a JPEG and then 3x to a RAW file. Tell me what the two looks like after the fact. I put money that you'd very little pixelation in the RAW but the JPEG would look like it has holes in it.

Here is one situation that most people have problems with: CAR SHOWS. At an auto show, all of the displays have different color temperature lighting. If you shoot JPEG you'll have to manually adjust white balance on the camera in EVERY booth or risk having weird looking color pics. With RAW all you have to do is use the white balance eye dropper tool when you get home and click on a white/grey area. Voila, white balance done. One less thing to worry about.

One trick Eric taught me when shooting RAW is to always set the camera to underexpose by -1. His point is that you can always brighten and not lose any detail but if the picture is overexposed then you're pretty much screwed. There isn't a way to recover detail loss in blownout highlights.

The one disadvantage is that it takes time to learn the values to use in the RAW converter and it does take more time to use. You know what though? Screw it. If you had a chance at a once in a lifetime, pic shoot it in RAW. Another disadvantage is that it takes up more space on the memory card since it is uncompressed.

RAW+L just gives you two files. The RAW is stored along with JPEG picture. It gives you a RAW file to edit in case you weren't happy with the in-camera processed JPEG.

RAW FTMFW!

 

[newton]

Wow, thanks man! If you don't mind me asking, what program do you use to process RAW and convert it? Can Photoshop do it?

 

[SDSilverM3]

Wow, thanks man! If you don't mind me asking, what program do you use to process RAW and convert it? Can Photoshop do it?

Np, that was just my reasoning behind why I use RAW. Eric will tell you the same. It just gives you flexibility and insurance.

I use the Adobe RAW converter in Photoshop since that's what I learned on and the values are second nature to me. There are other software out there like RAWSHOOTER (which was free until Adobe bought them?). Just stick to what you become comfortable with. :thumbup:

Did you get your dSLR?

 

[newton]

Yes, I did. I was playing with it last night. Man, all the settings confused me. lol

Both of these were at shutter 2.5 seconds and F5.6 I believe. I slightly adjusted the WB.

 

[JmanE55]

Nice pictures Newton. :thumbup:

 

[SDSilverM3]

The white balance looks good and pics look sharp. One thing you should consider is dropping the ISO down to 100 since you were on a tripod anyway. It'll reduce the background noise (grain).

What lens?

 

[newton]

I was using ISO200. My pictures usually look grainy at the end because I like the sharpening filter.

My old EF 28-105 3.5-4.5. I'm buying two more kiddie lenses, the 18-55 kit and the 50 F1.8.

I've heard good things about the 17-40 (Tamron I think?), and of course I still want that 10-22, but who knows when I'll be able to come up with the cash for those.

 

[SDSilverM3]

To avoid the grain in the background, duplicate the layer and then sharpen. On the duplicated layer, erase whatever you don't want sharpened such as the sky then flatten to merge the layers. It'll cut down on the noise a bit.

 

[newton]

To avoid the grain in the background, duplicate the layer and then sharpen. On the duplicated layer, erase whatever you don't want sharpened such as the sky then flatten to merge the layers. It'll cut down on the noise a bit.

I'll try that, but I will also try RAW from now on. Thanks.

 

[iwrock]

Man you make my photochop skillz feel weak :dunno:

 

[SDSilverM3]

Photoshop is making my head hurt right about now with the E55 pics. :wall:

 

[newton]

Ling, will you be willing to share the EXIF data for the E55 images you posted over at mbworld? I can't download that little EXIF app here at work.

If you do mind, that's fine.

Edit: you posted them here too, oops.

 

[SDSilverM3]

Newton, I don't mind at all. Do you still want me to post them?

 

[newton]

Please do. You can tell me the data for just these two photos.

http://iiilgsrlll.com/mbworld/ali_e55/CRW_3993_1000_mbw.jpg

http://iiilgsrlll.com/mbworld/ali_e55/CRW_4000_1000_mbw.jpg

 

[SDSilverM3]

First one:

Make = Canon
Model = Canon PowerShot Pro1
Exposure Time = 1/125"
F Number = F3.5
Exposure Program = Manual
ISO Speed Ratings = 50

Second:

Make = Canon
Model = Canon PowerShot Pro1
Exposure Time = 1/125"
F Number = F3.5
Exposure Program = Manual
ISO Speed Ratings = 50

 

[newton]

I had no idea the Pro1 was that capable. Any reason you went wide open aperture as opposed to smaller and slower shutter?

 

[SDSilverM3]

The Pro1 supposedly has L-quality glass so it looks sharper than most point and shoots. Reason I went with wider aperture was because I was hand holding the camera in the shadows. I didn't want to risk camera shake. I usually try not to do wide open but sometimes circumstances force you to. The Pro1 is at it's sharpest in the F4-F5 range.

 

[newton]

RAW is great! For the sake of trying out RAW, I picked up the camera and randomly shot my monitor without even looking into the viewfinder. I used the Canon software.

So soft!

 

[iwrock]

Shouldn't you be looking at porn instead?