OK, I'm converted, NOW IT'S 100% RAW ALL OF THE TIME!!!

[Jarhead5811]

I'm writing this while DPP processes a batch of files. I've always shot .jpg only because of the outrageously large size of RAW files.


Well, because I know I'm very much an amateur (even if my family won't believe me)purchased larger memory cards and brought along a netbook, to dump to, when I shot my sister's wedding this past Saturday. I can not describe the power shooting raw gives you after the fact to correct things such as color balance. Also the styles feature my XSi has and I've never tried to use can be done after the fact with nice results.

[TucsonTRD]

I'm glad you saw the light. Hard drive space is cheap, your photography equipment and the memories they capture are not so cheap.

[nickds7]

Glad you shot in raw for the wedding! Space is so cheap now, there isn't much of an excuse. 1tb hard drives can be purchased for under $100 and as low as $80 for a good brand.

[peterborough_photography]

Raw is the only way to go, just gives you the extra bit of adjustment before processing the files.





If you shoot using JPEG this is all lost and trying to claim anything back is hard work.





Just get used to the big files and have lots of memory cards, I stick with 4-8 gb cards and have about 60 !!!!


That way if a card ever dies you dont loose everything, most important when shooting weddings.

[Derek Reese]

The only regret I had when I started shooting RAW was that I didn't do so from the beginning.

[Jarhead5811]

Amen!!!

[Dave Johnston]

The only regret I had when I started shooting RAW was that I didn't do so from the beginning.

Indeed. Welcome to the light.

[Sheiky]

[Y]

[nickds7]

but...but...http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm(sorry had to do it)

[Mark Elberson]

<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]

<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]but...but...http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"](sorry had to do it)
<div style="CLEAR: both"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]</div>
<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]

<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]KR is a D-Bag...


<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]

Raw requires dedicated software to read. If you just bought a new camera, you won't be able to open the files until you update your computer's software.

It's called DPP and it comes free with every Canon DSLR...even windows will display a thumbnail of a RAW image


<span style="font-family: Helvetica;"]
<p align="left"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]

Worse, many new cameras come out a week before the camera maker's software is updated, and if you use software by Adobe, Apple or others, may have to wait weeks (or much longer) until there is an update. That means you may not be able to open your files today with your new camera if you didn't shoot JPG!

If you must (although, see DPP reference above) shoot both RAW &amp; JPEG until your favorite RAW converter has been updated
<p align="left"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]

If you use Photoshop and Adobe Camera Raw, you just might have to buy the newest version of Photoshop, since Adobe doesn't update older versions to read the files from new cameras.

DNG
<p align="left"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]

If you're shooting action, raw doesn't work. You'll fill an 8 gig card faster than you can imagine.

I shoot a 5DII which creates RAW files that are about 25MB each. I can get 300+ images on an 8GB card...by the way, memory is cheap!
<p align="left"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]

I never shoot raw. Why would I? Raw is a waste of time and space, and doesn't look any better than JPG even when you can open the files.

This comment doesn't deserve a response
<p align="left"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]

Cameras all start with raw data and convert this data to JPG images with hardware in the camera. They then throw away the raw data since it's no longer needed.
<p align="left"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]Saving this raw data is exactly like people who save twenty years of newspapers in piles around their house. They know they might need the information sometime, but it sure gets in the way! Other people think they are crazy.
<p align="left"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]Some fancier cameras save this raw data so you can use software to do the same thing the camera's hardware did, later. Software takes much longer to do the same thing the camera's hardware does, but gives less confident people the chance to try to fix mistakes later.

Ask how many film shooters threw their negatives away after developing them. That fact is that JPEG is a "lossy" format so it's unwise to open, change, save more than once or twice (if at all). Both software and user's ability to process a RAW file get better with time. I for one have went back into my catelog and re-processed RAW files after upgrading software and/or learning more effective ways to get more out of an image.
<p align="left"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]

blah, blah, blah

I admittedly got tired of reading, yawn.