Comments on: Processing RAW Files in Adobe Lightroom

By: raine

raine — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:32:34 +0000

Thanku for the tips, i am not too crash hot with lightroom yet but will be checking out all your tutorials about it, and putting what i gain into practice! Cheers Raine

By: K Trang

K Trang — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:40:54 +0000

Most of these types of arguments stem from the fact that two different type of views are expressed to address two different points. The argument on one end is if RAW or JPEG is better. Quality wise, RAW is the best there is and that’s what people are saying. Now, the people justifying JPGs, what they are ACTUALLY saying is that RAW is better, but with disadvantages that outweigh the reason to switch to raw (e.g. larger file size, longer processing, having information that current monitors/printers can’t support). This really comes back to the old debate between usability and technology. They don’t always go hand in hand.

For me, RAW is great, but it makes my workflow so much slower to process and copy these huge files! Yes, there’s lower resolution RAW files, but that wouldn’t be comparing apples to apples (er… resolution to resolution). I think the reason why people are so stuck on one side is for valid reasons. If you listen to each other, you’ll realize that you guys all are right and agree; just about different points…

JPG PEOPLE: Give the RAW people acknowledgment that RAW is the best quality image you can get from your camera.

RAW people: Give the JPG people acknowledgment that there are some “side effects” that could outweigh the benefits of using RAW or that JPGs are most of the time good enough (90%).

By: Lukas

Lukas — Wed, 13 May 2009 07:52:44 +0000

I used to shoot a mixture of RAW + JPEG and then I would import them into Lightroom to process them. I found out that this is too time-consuming, especially when you have a lot of weddings lined up.
I now only shoot JPG, I even edit out in-camera whenever I have a spare moment during the reception and then I go straight to Photo Mechanic to select the keepers.
It saves a lot of time.

By: Mindrinos Dimtris

Mindrinos Dimtris — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 10:28:45 +0000

I am wedding photographer and I shooting in Jpg. I have tried many times to shoot in RAW format but i find it bad form me! I know that it’s is better quality photos from Raw. But i have tried many softwares ( lightroom – CatureOne – BibblePro ) to make my raw file like my jpg and i find it to difficult! I have make many correction in my camera to correct my photos (contrast – sharpness – saturation…. ) so I see many deferents in Raw and Jpg files! I believe that if you are sour that you take a good picture it better Jpg and if you are not in Raw. I used both of them but mostly jpg! I find Raw better for Landscape photography but not for weddings. All my photos in my website is form jpg

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 17:05:03 +0000

Dynamic range is the most important advantage RAW has over jpeg and has not been mentioned here. There is no way you can retain as much information in an 8 bit jpeg file as you can in a 14 bit RAW file. Compression means loss of image quality. Shooting RAW allows me to process that file for the highlights and again for the shadows and combine them in Photoshop for a result not possible shooting jpeg. If you study and understand the Zone System, this is the digital version. I don’t care about the number of images I can get on a card. I care about the quality of every image I create.

By: Keith

Keith — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:18:48 +0000

I do believe you are refering to WinRAR and RAR files, not RAW. This is something completely different. RAW files are digital camera image files, this is a photography site.

If you have WinRAR installed then you open RAR and ZIP files by double-clicking them like any other file in Windows and the program will handle the rest. Best of luck!

By: dave

dave — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 04:17:17 +0000

can someone help me i have winraw but i just dont know how to open up raw and zip files please someone help as i could do with opening them all the time and would a better program be better thanks …………..

By: John Short

John Short — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 00:32:29 +0000

Interesting and valid arguments Jeff, I sincerely hope the rookie comments were not directed at me ! I started photography at 17, developed my own mono and colour, even dish developed the film as i couldn’t afford a dev tank. made contact prints until I got my first enlarger.

Camera was a Zenith B with hand held exposure meter, aperture and shutter selected manually.

At 54 I hope I have learned a little about photography

By: Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:15:29 +0000

I am finding that the photographers that use RAW the most and swear by RAW opposed to JPG are photographer that came from film much like myself. If you think you can recover or bring back as much detail and information in JPEG as you can in RAW, you have absolutely no understanding about the differences of these two files.

tea eral grey stated “I just get annoyed when people say RAW is better and by using it it will make your photos better. Yes RAW files have slightly more information but its not information that is likely to be needed.”

Okay you really have NO understanding betwwen JPEG and RAW if you can actually say that with a straight face. in RAW and 8 mb image is an 8 mb image, in JPEG an 8 mb image is 4mb, where did the other 4mb go? It’s lost. You can’t recover something that is not there to recover.

“Like a wider colour gamut of colours that no printer or screen can reproduceâ€¦” There is SO much you have to learn about these file formats, RAW has EVERYTHING in it that the lense saw when it captured the image. JPEG has everything in it that the camera software/firmware interprets, huge difference.

Those that say they like the first image better than the second do say (A) because you just want to support your argument that JPEG is better than RAW OR (B) yoou have NO understanding of properly exposed image, which is understandable since the vast majority of you posting on this article are “digis” (people that THINK they are a photographer because their first camera was a digital camera and they started shooting about 5 years ago) as opposed to PHOTOGRAPHERS that started many years ago with film and have a complete understanding about light and how it effects exposure. Because you “like” how an image looks does not make it a properly exposed image. An image that meets all the proper exposure guides make it a properly exposed image, blown highlights fall beyond those exposure guides. Bunch of ROOKIES. Get educated.

By: kim

kim — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:39:55 +0000

wow… i dont see adobe photoshop lightrÆ¡om before …i see u do show bird in it..that’s cool..i want to design but it’s hard….i do adobe indesign and photoshop!!! i love it..thank for show how bird ..um i dont know how to say and explain what i mean this..i m not gÆ¡od explain..lol.. XP