Newbie seeking to understand RAW vs. JPEG

[peachy]

So, I understand that RAW and JPEG are different file formats, and that the RAW files are much larger, but I don't really understand what the benefit is of shooting in RAW. Much of what I've read seems to encourage folks to shoot in RAW, often because of something to do with post-processing, but it's all seemed kind of ambiguous. Can anyone clarify what the benefits are of shooting in RAW vs. JPEG?

Also, the manual for my camera (Canon Digital Rebel XT) says that when the camera is set to RAW, it "assumes that the image will undergo post-processing with a personal computer." Does this mean that if I take pictures using RAW and don't do some magic post-processing step, the pictures are somehow deficient? (Since I'm new, I'm not really up for doing much post-processing just yet.) I've tried taking some pictures using the "JPEG + RAW" setting, and the only difference I notice is that all the photos in RAW are a touch darker than the JPEG's. Any insight anyone could give about this stuff would be much appreciated!

[phlyersphan]

I'm not an expert (I've only been shooting with a dSLR since April 07) but I switched to shooting RAW this summer. Basically, RAW captures and preserves much more of the color and data in your image, which gives you a lot more flexibility for adjusting things in post-production. RAW isn't actually an image file but more of a data file, and it requires that you use your computer to generate jpeg's from those RAW files. You couldn't, for example, take a RAW file straight from your camera and post it to the web. You'd need to open the RAW file with your camera's RAW software, or something like Photoshop or Lightroom, and then export your RAW files as jpeg's (or whatever format you want).

I like RAW because if I make a mistake with a setting in the camera while shooting (such as, using the wrong white balance), I have a lot more flexibility in fixing that error in Lightroom. With jpeg, a lot of data is thrown out by your camera and not saved, so you lose a lot of leeway in fixing errors or tweaking photos.

For me, the only disadvantage to RAW was that I had to buy a bigger memory card, since the files are bigger. Other than that, I will never go back to shooting jpeg. In terms of workflow, it really didn't change how I do things. I use Adobe Lightroom to import RAW photos from my memory card to my computer, and once I go through the images and tag them and tweak them, I do an export in Lightroom to create the jpegs and upload the jpegs to flickr.

I'm trying to find the article that really sold me on RAW... if I can find it, I'll post the link!

[jiminyClickit]

peachy, Welcome

This comes up every few months. Here's some information from one of those discussions with a link:

RAW, or raw?

[velvet4269]

By shooting a photo with RAW, you can turn this into this much easier than trying to correct color & exposure using the curves tool.

[wulf]

In short, it gives you more options for processing the image but demands much more processing time per shot. In long... check out the link Jiminy gave (cheers JC).

Wulf

[s2u.black]

I'm new to raw too and found the link within the link that jc posted very useful. It's like recording the bass straight to the desk then playing with the eq later.
From my experience it really slows down everything you do afterwards. It's something to maybe build up to for me. More important stuff to worry about first - like getting the blasted subject in focus for instance.

[peachy]

Thanks for all the info... it makes a lot more sense now! I'll definitely be shooting in RAW from here on out.

[Megs Sixx]

I'm new to RAW as well and I use Canon Rebel XTi. my problem is that it won't transfer from the camera to the computer *shakes fist at camera*

This forum is so helpful!