RAW setting - what is it? why use it?

[weeksy]

As a beginner to DSLR phography, can someone explain, in simple terms when, where and how I might choose to use a RAW setting on my camera?

I have just seen a 'photoshopped' example of good editing from a RAW setting (Bad hair on a good day), but need more understanding of it before I venture there myself.

[Merlyn]

When and where is up to you. Raw has two advantages over jpeg. Raw provides higher image quality because the image is not compressed like a jpeg which loses some of it's orginal data. In RAW, the image is shot as it is taken or as the sensor sees it. In jpeg setting on the camera, some camera processing is taking place to provide a jpeg that looks good, color correction,sharpening etc...... In raw, you get to do this when editing. Plus working with a raw image, you never damage the original. Raw is fun to play with.

Shot Raw when you can. Storage is the main concern. Large file size for RAW captures.

Hope this helps some.

[Nicole]

In all honesty, you can ask 100 different people and get 100 different answers as to whether to shoot jpg or raw and why. So in a lot of ways, you have to read a lot and try a lot of things and decide which you feel is better. Raw is more work, but it also gives you more to work with.

There are a lot of resources out there for you to read on the subject matter about why to shoot one or the other and when to use one or the other. You might try having a look at:

RAW vs. JPEG (http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/raw-vs-jpeg/)
Raw vs Jpeg: Correcting under/over exposure (http://photodoto.com/index.php/2006/11/15/raw-vs-jpg-correcting-underover-exposure/)
Raw vs. Jpeg, Style or Substance (http://www.nikondigital.org/dps/dps-v-2-7.htm)
RAW vs JPG: Get it right the first time (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm)

Personally, I shoot RAW+jpg because I often want a quick version that I don't have to do as much to. Raw does take extra processing. However, when I do need to do corrections, I like to work with the RAW file.

Unfortunately, this is not a straightforward sort of answer because it all comes down to you and personal preference :p

[dkchac]

What I have found is that as long as I have the photo in focus, I can do anything to it if I have taken it in RAW... Lighting bad, no problem... White balance bad, no problem... There are many ways to FIX a RAW photo that JPG does not allow. Once the camera setting is there in JPG, you are stuck with it (but with software you can tweak this a bit even), but with RAW, you have the full use of editing after the fact.

Now, I also take JPG+RAW. If I'm worried about storage on a shoot, I'll shoot exclusively in RAW. It means more processing time, though.

When you're doing sports action, you don't want to worry about camera settings as much as you want to get the shot. I worry about focus (and a bit about lighting), but the rest of it, I'll take care of later -- if I have shot my photos in RAW.

I think I just repeated everyone else... just my 2 cents. Hope it helps.

Debbie

[weeksy]

Thanks to all those who provided answers. Now all I need is to disgest them, and decide when I might best use them.

I get the feeling RAW is very much for those who are into tweaking photos, and improving on situations like bad light, colour etc. At the moment, I think I want to first improve my skills at seeing and shooting better photos, before I get too imaginative. So I'll keep watch hear to try ideas others post!

[clickdeath]

I dont shoot raw for one main reason:

I cant afford tons of storage space.

I went out one day and shot 1200 photos, i was shooting a yoyo contest and documented every single competitors freestyle, for almost the whole 3 minutes, the buffer was full constantly, i just shot the whole thing.

I shoot Small, Normal qual on my D50, and didnt fill the card, if I had been shooting raw, i would have needed about 6GB of storage, then when I got home, I would have had to put those 6GB of images on my computer, that's fine for one day, 6GB isnt that much space, but when I look at my camera, and realise i've taken over 8000 pictures since May, thats a lot of pictures. I went through my Aperture library not very long ago and deleted absolutely loads of pictures, a lot of them werent very good because I had never shot a dSLR before, I was very new to it all, so now I only have 4000 images in my library. But still lets say the average RAW file is 10MB, that would have been 80GB of images, in just over 6 months, I have a 5 month old Macbook Pro, and that only has a 100GB drive. As a student I literally cant afford to keep upgrading my external hard drive, its a 200GB at the moment and it's nearly full already, with all sorts of stuff on it, mainly music and videos, so that's got no chance of fitting images on it too!

So yeah that's main reason I dont shoot RAW. You'll find yourself shooting a lot of images in the first few months of having your camera if you're anything like me, and you'll find your hard drive quickly filling up!

I hope this completely randomly structured post has helped you out.

All the best, Jon

[weeksy]

Thanks, Jon. I had wondered about that (file size, that is).

The way I take photos at the moment, there is no way our 2gb card will fill too quickly, but I can see that happening with RAW data. Maybe it will be a once in a while thing to play with - unless I get really serious about it all!!

Then, as you say, how much can the average computer store? And yes, I probably need to sort out the many photos I now have and decide what's worth keeping, rather than clogging up the hard drive!

[dkchac]

Storage solutions:

Backup on CD or DVD: My RAW photos are my negatives and I store them on CD or DVD and get them off my computer's hard drive.

Seagate USB 300 GB Backup External Hard Drive: Inexpensive way to get all those unwanted photos of computer hard drive, but not loose them forever. This is a fairly inexpensive solution, too.

Oh -- I almost forgot. I take a Wolverine 80GB portable backup drive -- serves also as a card reader for laptop when I get home. Has worked wonderfully for me. No problems taking RAW photos when I've got the means to store them.

These have been my solutions for the RAW large file problem.

Debbie

[Bail]

Storage solutions:

Backup on CD or DVD: My RAW photos are my negatives and I store them on CD or DVD and get them off my computer's hard drive.


I Just want to add a bit of advice for those whom back up onto disc.
Make sure to use ARCHIVAL Quality CD/DVD's. Reason being is that those bulk CD/DVD's can not hold up to long term abuse (especially DVD's). Another thing that's a pain is warping. The different changes in climate could warp a disc over time. It would be very hard to gain back all your work.

As for the topic at hand.

When I am in my serious mode (i.e Events where I am asked to do photography) I shoot in raw. If you plan to do any HDR Images, I also suggest RAW.
But when I am just running around the woods or messing around, I shoot in JPEG.

It pays to have a big fast card. I would take a SanDisk 2gb Ultra II over regular 4 gig.

[Rommel]

Just some more information about file sizes: in RAW mode, with a 10 MP D80, each shot is around 10MB. So a 2GB card will hold 150-200 photos - as opposed to 600 or so JPEGs. That said I shoot RAW at the moment and plan on shooting RAW+JPEG when I get more storage.

There is one more issue that goes along with the RAW/JPEG debate that hasn't been mentioned: buffer speed. If you find yourself shooting in burst mode often, the speed of your card will be an issue in RAW mode. Fast cards can store 20MB/sec (and I think there is a 40GB/s CF card now), but slower ones store 10MB/sec or slower. You can see that this will cause the camera buffer to fill up in RAW mode. With their smaller file sizes, I imagine that JPEGs will allow for more photos/sec in burst mode with slower storage cards. Maybe someone who shoots JPEG can confirm this?

[Merlyn]

Camera Raw in it's deepest form. Tech info. (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/RAW-file-format.htm)