Once you've taken photos that are showing posterization or over/under exposure, and realize you can't do much with the jpg, you'll never shoot jpg again.
The 8 bit jpg is overcooked and overbaked. Working with a 16 bit RAW file will change your mind once and for all. Memory is cheap, so always shoot RAW.
Originally Posted by clemmb
Print Quality! While we ponder that for a while. I've seen that video before, in fact I have it bookmarked in my browser, I agree with getting it right the first time, but I don't agree with everything they say. Jpeg is not fine for everything.
I started out with film years ago, and what we shot with the camera is what we were stuck with. Didn't have all this computer software and manipulation tools on hand.
The digital age doesn't change the fact that you should get the white balance and exposure right in the camera, but it gives you much more flexibility which is necessary with the digital age of the Internet, publications and photo printing that have all gone digital as well. Each have their differences and you can cover them all shooting RAW and working with full resolution 16 bit images. On one hand however, if all you're going to do is share your images on the Internet or print them for your personal collection then Jpeg is fine. It saves space!
If you take your pictures to a professional print shop, or want them printed into a publication of some kind they are going to want at the least a high resolution 16 bit tif which is better for quality print. You cannot convert your 8 bit jpeg up, but if you had a RAW you could convert to the format and resolution necessary.
.
With the majority of my photography, I still do prefer to do the least amount of processing as possible even though I have to tools to do much more; I want people to see what I can do with the camera. Usually I just crop and resize for whatever presentation or print. However, there are times I like to test out my Photoshop skills and manipulate the image making all sort of changes i.e. composites, overlays etc. Having the data available makes that easier.
There are also times when your going to grab your camera to capture that once in a life time shot that you only have a brief moment to capture and not have time to make sure the white balance and exposure are just perfect. Then what? are you going to have a bad Jpeg or a salvageable RAW.
Precisely. Couldn't have said it better myself.
Here's a perfect example of a blown shot (no pun intended) that I took. I had my camera in the back seat of the car. I didn't know that the top wheel on the camera had moved from its set position. It went from the Av mode to the manual mode (where the f/stop was at 4 and shutter speed much slower).
It wasn't until further down the road that I took more pictures, then realized the dial had moved. Too late. When I got home, loaded the images, I groaned inside as I realized my mistake.
The first shot would be what the jpg would look like. The second was after I adjusted the RAW image. I breathed a sigh of relief.
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/4137.blown-highlights.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/5670.adjusted-with-raw.jpg[/img]
I use a professional lab who began only dealing with professional photographers. They still predominantly deal with professional photographers. They recommend sRGB. I am sure there are other labs that differ.
If I calibrate my monitor, use my labs calibration print system and view the calibration print under color corrected lights then they will look the same. Do you have color corrected lights in your print viewing room?
I shoot raw + jpg so I have all options available to me. I do agree raw is very powerful.
Mark
Mark
Here are some good articles on these topics
Why Color Management
The Raw File Format
Working Space Comparison srgb vs Adobe RGB
What my photo lab has to say about sRGB in their FAQs
Q. What is the difference between
color spaces?
A. SRGB is very close to the gamut
of photographic paper. Adobe RGB and ProPhoto each have color a gamut that is
much larger than that of photographic paper. Therefore, when adjusting files
for photographic printing, you should use SRGB so that you see a close
representation of what the paper will print. Below is a chart comparing various
color spaces to the color gamut of photographic paper.
[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x600/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/8117.Untitled.jpg[/img]
Mark
Your print shop tries to blame photographic paper, which is nonsense (and it has been for quite a few years now). What is incompatible with the AdobeRGB color space is their printing equipment/technique.
The real reason most print shops still require sRGB is that they don't want to mess with a variety of color spaces coming from all kinds of customers: some knowledgeable and some without a clue. They don't want to risk their reputation when color conversions go bad, therefore, they require everybody to comply with the lowest common denominator. That's the easiest way, not the best way.
I still recommend using RAW format and AdobeRGB color space for all those people who demand highest technical quality - especially those who print their own images and are willing to invest in time/money/patience toacquire necessary knowledge, maintain proper color management routines and owning pro quality printers, inks and papers.
Don't get me wrong. I do not think that there is something wrong with using sRGB. For the great majority of photographers and their customers, sRGB gives results that are indistinguishable from AdobeRGB. But if one desires the best quality possible, AdobeRGB is the superior way to go. In few years, maybe ProPhoto will become the way to go. So far, the technology still has some catching up to do.
I am sure that is partly true, however, my lab does not require it, just recommends it. They will work with whatever i choose to work with.
My eyes are not that good that I can see that difference in the final print. I'll continue to shoot raw + jpg and us sRGB. I feel it gives me the easiest/quickest work flow for the money and my customers love my work.
Mark
Mark
Hi all. Just to provide viewpoint from the other side of the fence (kind of) I shoot in JPEG.
However this is simply a matter of time, experience and expectations. I never seem to have much time, so getting JPEG straight out of the camera is great. I have no experience at adjusting pictures. I have no expectation placed on the photos I
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote