Do you shoot RAW?
lcoopie
Posts: 8,755 ✭✭✭✭✭
According to my new photography education,
which is obviously very basic,
it seems like most real pros currently shoot in RAW format (vs jpg format that most of us are familiar)
Here are the advantages of RAW shooting
You can adjust the white balance after the shoot with more accuracy and less artifacts
You can recover highlights that have been overexposed, you can change the exposure by 1 stop in either direction.
You can do more edits without degradation
There are obviously no jpg artifacts
You can apply the same adjustments to multiple pics in one step
You always have the original RAW photo to go back to if you want to re-edit later ( it's like a film negative)
Granted the pic size is larger, and a faster computer is required.
So it seems to make sense to me to shoot RAW for my coin photos,
what do you think.
which is obviously very basic,
it seems like most real pros currently shoot in RAW format (vs jpg format that most of us are familiar)
Here are the advantages of RAW shooting
You can adjust the white balance after the shoot with more accuracy and less artifacts
You can recover highlights that have been overexposed, you can change the exposure by 1 stop in either direction.
You can do more edits without degradation
There are obviously no jpg artifacts
You can apply the same adjustments to multiple pics in one step
You always have the original RAW photo to go back to if you want to re-edit later ( it's like a film negative)
Granted the pic size is larger, and a faster computer is required.
So it seems to make sense to me to shoot RAW for my coin photos,
what do you think.
LCoopie = Les
0
Comments
no... I'm fully dressed !...why?
I shoot my pix in "nef" (nikons version of raw) then re-format the pix into "tif" which is "loss-less"...edit from there.
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
<< <i>
OMG, I am freaking dying!!!!!
Go to Early United States Coins - to order the New "Early United States Half Dollar Vol. 1 / 1794-1807" book or the 1st new Bust Quarter book!
<< <i>okay ... i'll be serious...
I shoot my pix in "nef" (nikons version of raw) then re-format the pix into "tif" which is "loss-less"...edit from there. >>
why not edit it in the nef format?
I don't think Photoshop handles them, does it?
The MS editors I don't think handle them either......
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
I don't even bother with the white balance on the camera anymore, I used photoshop to calibrate the white balance from a color card and then saved the settings. Now it does not matter what the settings in the camera, one click in photoshop and it's like magic.
... are we talking about coins here?
<< <i>Yep,
I don't even bother with the white balance on the camera anymore, I used photoshop to calibrate the white balance from a color card and then saved the settings. Now it does not matter what the settings in the camera, one click in photoshop and it's like magic.
Ben, for us novices, care to give a walk through on this? I understand what it means, but where to click and set this up in PS is not clear....
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>It really depends on what you intend the finished product to be. If you are a professional photographer, shooting photos for a magazine, or wanting to create a poster sized print of your shot, then RAW is the way to go. If you are shooting coin photos to view on your computer or post to the Internet, JPG is fine. RAW does have definite advantages, but the trade-off in sheer size and computer power doesn't really warrant the RAW format if you are simply taking photos to store on your computer or put on a website. At least, that's my opinion. >>
a free program
to do basic editing of NEF files
conversion to jpg,
and batch adjustments
called ViewNX
Pshop handles NEF just fine, just gotta make sure that you have the version of photoshop that can handle files from your particular camera.
I convert all of my NEF images into DNG format that is a photoshop RAW file. Photoshop has a free converter for doing this (DNG converter).
<< <i>Photoshop doesn't want to open my .NEF files. What's the secret? >>
CS2 didn't support them, but CS3 and CS4 do.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
<< <i>It really depends on what you intend the finished product to be. If you are a professional photographer, shooting photos for a magazine, or wanting to create a poster sized print of your shot, then RAW is the way to go. If you are shooting coin photos to view on your computer or post to the Internet, JPG is fine. RAW does have definite advantages, but the trade-off in sheer size and computer power doesn't really warrant the RAW format if you are simply taking photos to store on your computer or put on a website. At least, that's my opinion. >>
I rarely disagree with Dwayne but here I will.
What is the downside? Computer storage and processing speeds are cheap. Raw gives you the most flexibility. It's the only way to go.
Lance.
<< <i>
<< <i>Yep,
I don't even bother with the white balance on the camera anymore, I used photoshop to calibrate the white balance from a color card and then saved the settings. Now it does not matter what the settings in the camera, one click in photoshop and it's like magic.
Ben, for us novices, care to give a walk through on this? I understand what it means, but where to click and set this up in PS is not clear.... >>
It would be a bit hard to walk through it here, It will be summer before I have time but I could write up little article then I might need a little reminder late July early August if you still want help by then.
It requires downloading a script and running it in photoshop to get the correct settings. The color card is not cheap either its $50-$100 depending on the card but well worth it if you take hundreds of photos. Basically I do this for each type of lighting.
I shoot with a Nikon at work which is in NEF, convert it to DNG; for web use I use the "save for web" option to keep the size of jpegs down. The upside is that if I ever need to go back and redo the photo for print or another use, I have the files there safe and sound as large as I could ever need them.
The Pentax I am currently using for personal work shoots in DNG, which cuts out a step. (And in a pinch I can convert from RAW to jpeg in the camera, complete with adjusting the brightness and color balance, etc.)
If you adjust a jpeg you are actually destroying the image, taking away bits and pieces of the information stored in the file, and you can't get that back. It's just not worth it.
Now, if I were shooting a piece of furniture to post on craigslist, sure, jpeg will do just fine, but for coins or personal use? Shooting anything other than RAW is just silly. Memory is cheap, period.
coins for sale at link
https://photos.app.goo.gl/RHLAY4akJQYhZGL18
<< <i>CS2 didn't support them, but CS3 and CS4 do. >>
Ah ha. Needless to say then, the original CS doesn't support them either!
<< <i>As new camera come online Adobe adjusts PShop to allow NEF from that camera, but only for the most recent version. >>
Dang it....I think my PS 6.0 misses out then
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
coins for sale at link
https://photos.app.goo.gl/RHLAY4akJQYhZGL18
<< <i>my goodness, I have no idea what you folks are discussing. is RAW a setting on the digital camera? >>
Yes,
It's basically the image the camera sees with no modifications. Much larger than the standard setting which is .jpeg that makes all the changes like white balance, color correction, exposure etc... for you.
This allows you to play with all those camera settings on the computer rather than on the camera.
<< <i>
<< <i>my goodness, I have no idea what you folks are discussing. is RAW a setting on the digital camera? >>
Yes,
It's basically the image the camera sees with no modifications. Much larger than the standard setting which is .jpeg that makes all the changes like white balance, color correction, exposure etc... for you.
This allows you to play with all those camera settings on the computer rather than on the camera. >>
RAW is not really even an image. Just the recordings of the individual red/green/blue photosites. The image must be reconstructed. normally done by the camera to the tastes of the camera designers. RAW allows you to fully control that reconstruction. Very powerful stuff.
RAW is the file that the digital sensor of the camera collects
before any processing by the camera.
Normally the camera, which is a computer by the way,
has to process the RAW data in order to make a
presentable image that we normally look at (jpg),
its not just compression that is going on.
so the jpg that we normally think of as right from the camera,
have already been processed by the camera (computer)
but the camera may not do as good of a job as a person
who can tweak the settings better, and get a more accurate image.
Also your desktop or laptop has more computing power, and more time
to do this conversion.
Is that right Mark?
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't even bother with the white balance on the camera anymore, I used photoshop to calibrate the white balance from a color card and then saved the settings. Now it does not matter what the settings in the camera, one click in photoshop and it's like magic. >>
Can you do this with Photoshop elements? If so, how? I have elements, but have not used it and not familiar with the options.
Thanks. >>
I believe so, my last version of Elements did it but I have not used it for a while.
<< <i>I do and now my wife is expecting our first in about 6 1/2 months. I have learned my lesson. >>
Expensive lesson learned!
<< <i>simply,
RAW is the file that the digital sensor of the camera collects
before any processing by the camera.
Normally the camera, which is a computer by the way,
has to process the RAW data in order to make a
presentable image that we normally look at (jpg),
its not just compression that is going on.
so the jpg that we normally think of as right from the camera,
have already been processed by the camera (computer)
but the camera may not do as good of a job as a person
who can tweak the settings better, and get a more accurate image.
Also your desktop or laptop has more computing power, and more time
to do this conversion.
Is that right Mark? >>
Not Mark, but yes this is right, the camera processes the image, for example it does sharpening. Some of this is controllable via the camera user interface if you know where to look. Also JPEG compression is lossy, and there is less information in the JPG than in a RAW image.
is loss-less, just like TIFF, so there is no reason to convert to TIFF.
<< <i>from my understanding the Nikon NEF format
is loss-less, just like TIFF, so there is no reason to convert to TIFF. >>
It is true that RAW images are lossless, but I store my archive images in TIFF, or more recently in DNG as they are more likely to be readable by whatever new software comes out in the future over a manufacturer and camera specific RAW format. This is one of the things that Adobe touts as being a benefit of DNG.