View Single Post
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 10-14-2009, 01:59 AM
vandergus's Avatar
vandergus vandergus is offline
Person
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Posts: 1,088
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nemesis256 View Post
So I just took a bunch of test shots to find out what could be different between my RAW and JPG images. Active D-Lighting definitely affects RAW images. The White Balance setting also affects RAW images. I then tried setting the color profile to Adobe instead of sRGB and I still saw major differences between the RAW and JPG images.

I think I'll just shoot in RAW only from now on. It will save me the time of comparing the two. If anyone thinks this is a bad idea please chime in. Does anyone else shoot in RAW only?
The white balance setting in the camera doesn't actually effect the data in the RAW file. Your RAW converter, however, may see a tag for the white balance setting that was used and set it to that by default in the converter. But you can change the white balance in the RAW converter without any degradation of the image. I'm not sure about Active D-Lighting.

You mentioned earlier that you were using iPhoto. I would not recommend shooting RAW if that is your only editor. I use iPhoto for organization and sending to flickr, things like that. But it's lousy at handling RAW files. Technically, it can do it. It's just lousy. Invest in Photoshop Elements or Capture NX2 if you're going to be shooting RAW extensively.

And just another thought. Don't shoot RAW with the goal of trying to make your RAW files look like SOC jpgs. Shoot jpg if you want that. Shoot RAW so you can make the photos look how you want them to look. Good luck.
__________________
flickr
Why I Like Photographs

"It's more expensive, but it lets me adjust really specific settings that most people don't notice or think about." - Abed
Reply With Quote