Discussion in 'Photography' started by GassMan, Sep 29, 2007.

  1. GassMan

    GassMan Guest

    Will someone please explain to me the difference between RAW and JPG
    photos? I have a Canon 10D, and am planning a long awaited trip, and
    want to take lots of pics...the right way. Would appreciate any
    information. Thanks.
    GassMan, Sep 29, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. GassMan

    Pat Guest

    Google this newsgroups and you'll find about 50,000 posts on the
    Pat, Sep 29, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. GassMan

    ray Guest

    Several differences - for starters, jpeg is a 'lossy' format. Every time
    you save a picture as jpeg you loose some detail. For another, jpeg is 8
    bits per color channel, i.e. each pixel is contains an 8 bit value for
    red, green and blue - total 24 bits. Raw is usually 12 bits per channel.
    May not seem like much difference until you realize that 8 bits gives 256
    different values - 12 bits is 4096 - i.e. 16 times as much range. If you
    have the resources, it's better to shoot raw - you have much more latitude
    for post processing.
    ray, Sep 29, 2007
  4. You can easily find dozens of web pages that will tell
    you what RAW is and what JPG is, and you'll get a dozen
    or so responses here too.

    And *none* of them will likely be on target for you.
    That's because "take lots of pics" can mean 100, or
    100,000. And "The Right Way" is different for each

    So while any number of people here may know exactly what
    RAW and JPG are, they can't tell you what the
    significance is unless you tell them a *lot* more about
    what you want to do. What restrictions do you have,
    what resources do you have, how flexible are you? All
    that in addition to exactly what you want to do.

    For example... If you *really* want to do it right,
    you'll need a pair of laptops, just in case one breaks.
    (Same with cameras and essential lenses.) Then you need
    twice as many memory cards as you would normally think
    necessary. Then you need two redundant computer storage
    systems, each of which are about twice as big as you can
    imagine needing.

    One good way to do that is with a USB or Firewire
    attached hard disk. Some people like to use a RAID
    array so that when they write images off to backup it
    automatically goes to two separate disks. I haven't
    tried that, and so far have only used one onboard disk
    and a separate USB attached disk (80 Gb onboard and
    200Gb on the USB, but have not mated them up as a RAID

    You could easily need a couple of 700Gb USB disks... or
    just as easily a single 10 Gb disk might be enough. It
    depends on what you do and just how "right" you want to
    Floyd L. Davidson, Sep 29, 2007
  5. GassMan

    Paul Furman Guest

    Raw has the individual pixel data before translating to a smaller
    significant digit and before mixing the RGB pixels (Red Blue Green
    Green) into a composite image. What that means is you can do a better
    job of stretching the exposure and reclaim overexposed highlights and do
    a better job of lifting underexposed shadows and incedentally it's real
    easy to adjust the White Balance or color temperature if the lighting is
    more warm or cool.

    If you got every shot perfect with the right camera settings, there is a
    slight improvement you could get from the better performance of a
    desktop computer compared to a limited on-camera processor strapped by
    the limitations needed to perform quickly with a small processor in the
    field but that's not significant.
    Paul Furman, Sep 29, 2007
  6. GassMan

    Joel Guest

    You can always GOOGLE for more WAR than you can chew. And I bet you
    already know what JPEG is, and probably have heard plenty of RAW.

    Me? JPEG is father of RAW <bg>
    Joel, Sep 29, 2007
  7. Lots of comments. I am going to drop all the technical stuff and talk about
    the effects. Also think of raw files as a negative and jpg files as a print.

    If you use raw files you will not get anywhere as many on a flash memory card.
    My Canon XT has a ratio of 3 to 1 (jpg to raw). However if your photo has
    either spots that are some what underexposed or overexposed the spots may be
    able to be correct when you create a jpg.

    A jpg file has been processed in the camera using the settings in the camera
    to process the raw file. If the photo has overexposed or underexposed area
    you probably cannot correct them.

    I found that I was not happy with the default jpg creation settings when I
    was taking pictures outdoors were very contrasty. I ended going to a custom
    parameter setting to cut back the contrast setting. This provided a much
    better jpg under most conditions.

    Hope this help a bit.

    William Hathaway via PhotoKB.com, Sep 29, 2007
  8. GassMan

    SteveB Guest

    Goodie. Then let's just get rid of the newsgroup.

    SteveB, Sep 29, 2007
  9. GassMan

    ray Guest

    Quite a dissertation - but all he asked was "what's the difference" -
    which you didn't address.
    ray, Sep 29, 2007
  10. GassMan

    Pat Guest

    On this subject, what could possibly be said that hasn't been said
    before. The OP is just too lazy to look up and answer. In that case,
    the OP doesn't deserve an answer. Period. A person, no matter how
    new, can do a bit of research. OTOH, if the person did a bit of
    research and had a question, that's another story altogether.

    Besides, looking at the previous posts will instantly give the person
    thousands of thought instead of waiting here for posts to dribble in.
    Pat, Sep 29, 2007
  11. GassMan

    Pat Guest

    .... and the winner of "best post in the thread" is Floyd Davidson for
    Barrow Alaska ....
    Pat, Sep 29, 2007
  12. GassMan

    Pat Guest

    Um, "serious photographers" shoot jpg to reduce the amount of post-
    processing because no lab takes raw. JPG is the format of the working
    professionals I know.

    The professional workflow for the first bunch of prints is often card--
    Pat, Sep 29, 2007
  13. GassMan

    David Guest

    I just went through this issue myself. What to shoot?

    My solution you might want to consider if you have the ability to edit
    RAW files.

    If you just want a lot of fun memories of your trip, shoot jpg. In
    fine mod if you have the storage capacity. Usually 2-3meg files.

    If you see something that appeals to your 'serious photographer' side
    then shoot raw. 'Serious photographer' meaning something you'd enter
    in a 'serious photo' contest. 8-20meg files.

    Simply put, there are elements you can adjust in the raw format that
    you can't once it's converted it to jpg.

    Hope this helps.

    David, Sep 29, 2007
  14. GassMan

    SteveB Guest

    SteveB, Sep 29, 2007
  15. GassMan

    SteveB Guest

    I find it just the opposite. It takes me more time to sift through all of
    the google garbage information where a search on RAW will bring you
    everything from fish to fowl, with a little bit of photography thrown in.
    Millions of articles, with just a few relevant to my search.

    In newsgroups, people will send in concise explanations (such as some of the
    outstanding ones posted) that are immediately helpful.

    I am constantly amazed when I google on things. I get hits that have
    absolutely NOTHING to do with the information I want. And I have to look
    and look and look and look and look. I'm sorry, but I just don't have the
    time to sit and sift through all that sand for the nuggets of knowledge. I
    also had a traumatic brain injury, and this lessens my ability to absorb and
    digest massive amounts of information heaped on me in the milliseconds it
    takes for Google to return information.

    So, for you, Google works the best. For me, direct newsgroup contact is my
    favorite way, and THEN, I'll stroll Google while I'm waiting for answers, or
    if answers don't come.

    As for your comments about being too lazy, what qualifies you to assess the
    motives and reasons for people preferring to use newsgroup answers rather
    than Google? You sound like a professor. If you don't like lazy people,
    people who don't know as much as you about a particular subject, and those
    who do not meet your expectations and standards, why don't you just join a
    moderated forum where you won't have to put up with the unwashed rabble?

    SteveB, Sep 29, 2007
  16. GassMan

    SteveB Guest

    This simple one sentence gives the answer to me, and I'm thick headed. Your
    previous comments in this post were also clear and concise.

    I regret to inform you, though, that it was all for naught, as this
    information has been posted in Google already, and therefore your concise
    post is wasted on the lazy. (Like me. Thanks very much.)


    Steve ;-)
    SteveB, Sep 29, 2007
  17. GassMan

    SteveB Guest

    Man, you seriously NEED to go to a proctologist and see what it is you have
    stuck up your ass!

    SteveB, Sep 29, 2007
  18. So far I'm the only one who has actually addressed his

    If you read his post carefully enough, he asked
    something much different than just a simple "what's the
    difference". He tacked on "to me". He may or may not
    be interested in what the significance is to you and I.
    He wants to get it "right" on a "long awaited trip".

    You can ignore that and comment on your favorite peeve
    about JPG vs. RAW, but it probably won't do him any
    good, other than perhaps as entertainment on a nice
    weekend afternoon.
    Floyd L. Davidson, Sep 29, 2007
  19. Oh yeah? Most pros I know send TIFF files to their labs.
    Randall Ainsworth, Sep 29, 2007
  20. GassMan

    ray Guest

    I don't have any particular peeves either way, but I did explain the
    ray, Sep 29, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.