Snap in JPEG or Raw?
- Thread starter davidsim
- Start date
- Status
I think this question has been asked several times before, so CS itself holds a good archive of information, if anyone is hardworking enough to dig it up.
Perhaps reading this may help understanding why and when to use RAW format. I'm not sure how accurate the technical details of the article relative to the CR2 format, but if it's as described, then really RAW is good for extracting the extra dynamic range of your DSLR.
Perhaps reading this may help understanding why and when to use RAW format. I'm not sure how accurate the technical details of the article relative to the CR2 format, but if it's as described, then really RAW is good for extracting the extra dynamic range of your DSLR.
Actually, storage is getting cheap, really, (compare that to your bodies and lenses) so shooting JPEG to save space is I think no longer a very strong argument. If your body is capable, I would have shot in RAW+JPEG, the JPEG will be used in case got pple want to instantly look. The RAW is more for archival purposes for me. I have all these times, shot exclusively in RAW and have recently started using RSE for batch conversion. It is no hassle to me as I'm familiar with the workflow. I store my RAWs on 2 copies of DVD-Rs (they are dirt cheap now compared to 2+ years ago).
Regards,
JK
Regards,
JK
You'll need a PC + RAW conversion software to print your photos. You'll probably want to convert to a "lossless" format such as TIFF to get the highest quality.pktam71 said:
There's no guarentee that you'll get better pics from your printer "straight out of the camera", because there's a lot of factors involved in the whole workflow. However, using RAW gives you more data to manipulate in the first place.
matthewgjs
New Member
Pardon me for my peference..
Raw = Sushi
Jpeg = Bento set
My peference.. is (roll drum) = RAW ..
But not the file size of RAW
RAW gives me more chances to play with
:lovegrin:
Raw = Sushi
Jpeg = Bento set
My peference.. is (roll drum) = RAW ..
But not the file size of RAW
RAW gives me more chances to play with
:lovegrin:
ConnorMcLeod
New Member
+evenstar said:
I heard people say before that the best quality JPEG from camera is not as good as the DPP.
Anyone has done a test on this?
Apart from DPP and Photoshop, are there other RAW convertors available and can do some touch up on the picture before converting to JPEG/TIFF?
DPI is meaningless by itself without taking into account the resolution of the output device. Higher DPI in the source file doesn't mean more detail is generated. I think this has been discussed thoroughly in other threads, so I shall not regurgitate all the details here.chongctd said:
DPReview in all their reviews of EOS DSLRs have done tests of RAW conversion using ZoomBrowser's RAW Image Task (RIT), DPP and Adobe Camera RAW. RIT is basically a PC emulation of the DIGIC chip, while others have their own conversion algorithms. So not all RAW converters are created equal, I say.
If you compare a JPEG out of the camera vs. one generated by DPP (or any other 3rd party RAW convertors), there should be a difference - colours, details, dynamic range, etc.
andrewtanjk
New Member
Definitely in RAW. You get richer colours and when you edit using Photoshop there will be less problems when adjustements are made. I used to shoot JPG, but after shooting in RAW, you can really see the difference. Cheers!
Ah Pao said:DPI is meaningless by itself without taking into account the resolution of the output device. Higher DPI in the source file doesn't mean more detail is generated. I think this has been discussed thoroughly in other threads, so I shall not regurgitate all the details here.
DPReview in all their reviews of EOS DSLRs have done tests of RAW conversion using ZoomBrowser's RAW Image Task (RIT), DPP and Adobe Camera RAW. RIT is basically a PC emulation of the DIGIC chip, while others have their own conversion algorithms. So not all RAW converters are created equal, I say.
If you compare a JPEG out of the camera vs. one generated by DPP (or any other 3rd party RAW convertors), there should be a difference - colours, details, dynamic range, etc.
Thanks for your highlights on the DPI.
Hi AH Pao,
so in your opinion do you prefer RIT or DPP ?
so in your opinion do you prefer RIT or DPP ?
Ah Pao said:DPI is meaningless by itself without taking into account the resolution of the output device. Higher DPI in the source file doesn't mean more detail is generated. I think this has been discussed thoroughly in other threads, so I shall not regurgitate all the details here.
DPReview in all their reviews of EOS DSLRs have done tests of RAW conversion using ZoomBrowser's RAW Image Task (RIT), DPP and Adobe Camera RAW. RIT is basically a PC emulation of the DIGIC chip, while others have their own conversion algorithms. So not all RAW converters are created equal, I say.
If you compare a JPEG out of the camera vs. one generated by DPP (or any other 3rd party RAW convertors), there should be a difference - colours, details, dynamic range, etc.
- Status
Similar threads
