JPEG Vs RAW
View Single Post
06-10-09, 09:43 AM
Join Date: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by
I've recently started a photography course (only a short beginner kind of thing) and was amazed at the reaction I got off a few people on it when they learnt I didn't shoot in RAW
I have to admit always being slightly afraid (what a wuss I am!!) - what are the differences, benfits etc?
The easiest way to look at Raw is to think of it as a photo negative it is in fact just the raw digital data captured by the sensor in your camera you will always have to process it in a computer to get an image and the files size may be quite large needing a powerful computer to handle it. the advantage is that it is never altered so you can always go back to the original just like a film negative and that you can apply just the processing that you think it needs on an individual image basis.
Jpegs on the other hand are processed at least in part by the camera, usually to a set of rules you set up in your camera the most important of the steps it does when converting your raw data to a jpeg is that it compresses the file size to make it smaller and there by easier to handle, but this is a destructive process so you can never recover the lost data . that said if you choose a high quality setting you will see very little difference and if you only need small prints or only publish to the web then jpegs are absolutely fine.
Like Hi-Fi of years ago much rubbish is talked about resolution so unless you are building a portfolio or hoping to publish professionally or you want to spend time at your computer adjusting your images stick with jpegs compressed to level 10 or better
Make mine a double
Call Ed Crowther Photography on 07761926172 or Visit www.edcrowther.com
Weddings, Commercial, and Portrait photography in the Wessex region
View Forum Profile
Send a private message to ether
Visit ether's homepage!
Find all posts by ether