Hi,
I have been shooting JPEG ever since I went to digital.On several occasions I have considered moving over to RAW but have always stuck with JPEG because of ease of photoshopping. I've also heard some say that todays JPEGS are really good so you don't need to shoot RAW.
Either way, I have decided to have a go. I understand that I need Adobe Camera RAW, or is there any other software. I am using PSE 9 at present.
Any help or advice on processing RAWs much appreciated.
Thanks
Chris
If you have PSE 9 then you already have a version of Camera RAW. It might not recognise you camera's RAW files if the camera was released after PSE 9. If your camera allows you to shoot RAW in Adobe's DNG format this won't be an issue (Pentax DSLRs have this option, not sure about the other manufacturers). Failing that then there is RAW Therapee, which I think is free (GNU Licence the last time I looked) which should understand your camera unless it is really recent.
RAW files are just exactly what the sensor captures, whereas jpgs are processed in camera for sharpness, colour balance, noise reduction in some cases - things like that. The RAW interface in the editor allows you reinterpret the image using the higher colour depth information in the RAW file. A jpg has a colour depth of 8 bits - that's 16.7 million shades (approx). A 14 bit RAW image can have 4.4 trillion shades, for example.
Just had dinner time called - back later . .
The main advantages that using RAW gives are access to the full amount of information in the image file. Because there are so many more shades available in a RAW file it can be more resilient to harder editing, and will definitely give you smoother gradients. You will also find that you have more shadow detail to play with and highlights that appear blown or thin may be recoverable.
There are lots of tutorials out there in Youtube land and on the Adobe site to help you along. Like most things in photography the joy is is mucking about with it and seeing what you get.
Don't forget though that as you said to begin with, current jpgs are generally very good and more than often more than good enough. Personally, I always shoot in RAW or RAW+jpg. In the latter case you get to choose. :)
I was going to make a very long post, then I got lazy and used some Google-Fu.
http://www.slrlounge.com/school/raw-vs-jpeg-jpg-the-ultimate-visual-guide (http://www.slrlounge.com/school/raw-vs-jpeg-jpg-the-ultimate-visual-guide)
That is a good and not too geeky comparison of Raw vs Jpeg.
Here is another:
http://digital-photography-school.com/raw-vs-jpeg (http://digital-photography-school.com/raw-vs-jpeg)
I shoot Raw and I do not find it much more work to process.
Completely different from shooting in the raw ;)
Cheers guys. I'll try a RAW on my PSE9 and see how it goes. Thanks for the links too Don, very helpful.
Appreciate the help and I'll come back in a few days and let you know how I get on.
I converted to raw a year ago. Never looked back. I had to download a DNG conversion programme to convert on my ancient MAC but it works great.
Do you find it easy Chris, or do you spend more time editing now?
Cheers.
Its easier for me, and means you can always revert back to your raw image so long as you keep it, as once changes saved to a jpeg, the original image is lost for ever (if that makes sense).
Tried RAW and did not get on with it but think it is a "Marmite" thing.
Shot JPEG as a standard now but I always keep the original Chris so that is never lost and then do a back up which I will manipulate.
Horses for courses and I think it is always what you are comfortable with, think there are pros and cons off both.
I have always used jpegs, as my previous Sony bridge did not 'do' RAW. I have been happy with the results, but my 'personal tutor' has been nagging me to convert to RAW, ever since I bought a four thirds Panasonic, that can do RAW.
I recently shot my first RAW/jpegs. Got quite confused when I accidently edited a RAW file in E11 and it only showed up in my Editor, and left a 'blank space' in my catalogue. Haven't touched the RAW files since; am now waiting to be taken through the whole editing process. Finding a window for this, is a bit of a problem, as life is a bit hectic at the moment.
If we get on, I may change to RAW altogether, if not, I'll risk a set to with Mr. Tutor, and stick to jpegs.
I remember reading an interview once, I think in DGM, with a preofessional photographer, who always shot in jpeg, and managed to make a living, so it can't be that bad.
Like Jeff, I always keep my original shot, as E11, and most other editing programmes I would think, save the original when you save the edited version as 'save as.'
The idea of saving original RAW files worries me a bit, as they are so huge. I hope I will have the discipline to delete them, when I am happy with the end result. Or results, as I have a habit of making several 'versions' mof shots I like.
A look at this may help
http://digital-photography-school.com/raw-vs-jpeg
I was a little flabergasted to read that some 'professional' photographers can't handle RAW. ???
When I returned to the strange new world of digital photography I was advised to only shoot in RAW, since I might want to do other things with my images but with JPEG each time you do any manipulation of the image you lose some information.
As I've blundered on experimenting with L/room and CS I realise I can go back to the RAW image and apply what I've learned starting from scratch each time retaining the original image.
Jediboy, As Hinfrance says, if your camera is newer than your Elements 9 and does not have the ability to produce Raw files in DNG format (like my Pentax can), then you need to first convert your Raw files to DNG. Adobe supplies a free converter for this purpose (Adobe DNG Converter) for Windows here:
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5694 (There is of course a Mac version somewhere in the same download area.)
I had to use this for my newer compact Canon's CR2 raw files. I upload them to the PC, open the DNG converter software, open all the files at once in it, and watch it produce DNG format copies. It takes only seconds, and then double-clicking a DNG file will open it in Elements, with the camera raw window on top.
Simon
Thanks for all the comments. Some good pointers here.
I have a Nikon D300 thats older than my PSE9 so should be OK there.
I need some time, hopefully this weekend to have a 'play' and see how it goes.
Appreciate the help. ;)
Set your camera to save raw files, take a few shots and copy the files to your hard disk. Double-clicking one* should open Elements with the image in the raw window. Adjust each slider in turn from the top (brightness, contrast etc) and if you wish, use the crop, red eye etc tools. If you click "Done" it'll close the raw editor and remember the settings for that file for later (in a "sidecar" file). If instead you click "Open" it'll close the raw editor window and display your image in the usual Elements way, ready for saving as a jpg or whatever. If you do the raw adjustments nicely you might never need to use the Elements editor. Have Fun.
(*You can try selecting several at once when you're more practiced. Camera Raw can be set to apply the same adjustments to several files at once.)
Simon
Shooting in Raw was what led me to Lightroom. I wanted to have more control and the version of ACR in Elements did not have as much as in CS. However Lightroom did and was much less (even more so now!) so I bought it. Now I hardly leave LR for most editing.
I have just bought it too, for the same reasons. And on special offer (only till tomorrow) much cheaper than the latest Elements. It seems great so far, with enough tools that I'll probably only go to ELements if I need to use layers -ie. hardly ever.
I use the Nik software (Silver Efex, HDR Efex, etc) more than I do Elements.
Just bought Feb's DC Mag today and theres a good piece about Raw Jediboy, that may interest you.
Thanks Chris,I'll take a look.
No chance to even touch the camera yet this weekend. :'(
I'm curious. My understanding was that a RAW file could not be printed, and certainly my Adobe Camera Raw has no print option - I need to first open the image in Elements (or Lightroom). And of course ACR applies its own default settings as it opens the raw file, so I cannot ever see my original file. How then does AP magazine print "the original raw file with no processing applied", as for example on page 55 of the 4th January 2014 issue?
They convert it to tif or jpg without any processing of colour, sharpness, etc.
Donoreo, your avitar is very mean and moody! Good iamge.
Have pretty much used RAW since I had a computer powerful enough to use it (started digital in 2003 with 5mp and computer processing wasn't affordable until Xmas 2005).
The beauty for me, as has been said - is the amount of experimentation you can do with no loss to the orginal file.
The other big benefit was swapping over to Lightroom - it loves to work with RAW files - whilst providing a nice catalogue of images.
The only real down side to workign with RAW is that once you start to realise you can experiment with no loss to the original file and just wipe it and start again - you can start to spend a bit too much time experimenting, and not enough time actually taking and presenting pictures :uglystupid2:
Quote from: DigiDiva on January 12, 2014, 03:30:29 PM
Donoreo, your avitar is very mean and moody! Good iamge.
That was my self portrait entry for DCW Weekend Competition about a year or so ago :)
Started shooting RAW, combined with Jpeg, just in case.
This is my first RAW edited shot.
(http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/albums/userpics/11140/normal_Halo_over_Soton_Water_res.jpg) (http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=15127&fullsize=1)
Quote from: Reinardina on January 15, 2014, 08:48:28 AM
Started shooting RAW, combined with Jpeg, just in case.
This is my first RAW edited shot.
(http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/albums/userpics/11140/normal_Halo_over_Soton_Water_res.jpg) (http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=15127&fullsize=1)
Nice shot :tup: How well does it compare with the Jpeg version with the camera you are using ?
I agree, great shot.
And how did it compare tote JPEG?
Did you find it easy to edit the RAW?
As requested, the (unedited) JPEG version of my 'Halo' shot.
To be honest, I have not compared them myself yet.
And I did not find it easy to edit it, as it is so totally different. Mind you, I had my tutor sitting next to me, which made things very clear and easy to understand. The way he explained everything made total sense. After he left, I had a go on my own, and realised I had already forgotten half of his wise words!
It is basically a matter of sliding the sliders and see what it does to the image. I will persevere, at least for a while, as it is probably a matter of getting used to it.
I did the editing in E11 by the way. If I become a 'RAW enthusiast' I will have to get Lightroom, I've been told.
Jpeg
(http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/albums/userpics/11140/normal_Morning_stroll_with_Den_5260_JPG_res.jpg) (http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=15128&fullsize=1)
RAW
(http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/albums/userpics/11140/normal_Halo_over_Soton_Water_res.jpg) (http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=15127&fullsize=1)
Quote from: Reinardina on January 15, 2014, 12:06:13 PM
If I become a 'RAW enthusiast' I will have to get Lightroom, I've been told.
No you won't have to do anything. The basic ACR in Elements along with RAW Therapee was all I used for years. After that I bought Aftershot Pro*, which I still use for RAW editing - the Nostalgia plugin is just brilliant for black and white; I have had LR only since version 4* came out and I really don't use it much for editing as I find its 'global' and no layers approach to an image very restrictive. It is, however, a very good asset manager. Since I got the discounted deal on Photoshop CC I tend to use the full ACR that's in there, and then Nik* or Topaz*, rather than LR.
*All of the licences bought when they were at least 50% off :)
Hi H,
Lightroom 5 isn't just for global adjustments. It has very effective local adjustments including red eye and spot healing, and a very effective graduated filter with variable width and tilt, enabling control of brightness, highlights and shadows, contrast, saturation etc. Also a similar radial filter, local adjustment brushes which do all those things rather than just dodge/burn. I've never used version 4 but guess 5 must be quite a bit more comprehensive. I'm still learning it but suspect I'll hardly ever need Elements now.
Simon
Indeed Simon, LR does have all of those things. I do use it for basic conversion, exposure, highlights, shadows, maybe a bit of noise reduction, but anything more complex I find much more quickly done in a 'proper' editor. Being used to using layers and precise selections the adjustment brushes are just too vague and limiting. Aftershot Pro has a super one click conversion called perfectly clear, precise selections and layers. It is inferior to LR in many ways, but better in few others.
I appreciate that it is horses for courses, but the point I was trying to make is that you don't need LR to live happily with a RAW workflow.
H, which of the Topaz products do you use? I have Adjust and B&W effects, which I love..
And this is probably a very stupid question, but what does ACR stand for? I know it as a rifle, but as you do the shooting with a camera, I doubt you are talking about that.
For me it is far too early to talk about 'living with RAW!'
The talk about shooting, reminded me I have got another RAW conversion. This was done for me, to demonstrate 'how to.'
It is my shot though.
(http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/albums/userpics/11140/normal_Southampton_Water_with_gun_res.jpg) (http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=15131&fullsize=1)
Quote from: SimonW on January 15, 2014, 06:50:49 PM
I'm still learning it but suspect I'll hardly ever need Elements now.
Simon
I hardly ever do. I use any of the Nik programs more than Elements. I did just upgrade to Elements 12 before Christmas because I got it on a great sale ($54!).
Quote from: Hinfrance on January 15, 2014, 07:46:37 PM
Indeed Simon, LR does have all of those things. I do use it for basic conversion, exposure, highlights, shadows, maybe a bit of noise reduction, but anything more complex I find much more quickly done in a 'proper' editor. Being used to using layers and precise selections the adjustment brushes are just too vague and limiting. Aftershot Pro has a super one click conversion called perfectly clear, precise selections and layers. It is inferior to LR in many ways, but better in few others.
I appreciate that it is horses for courses, but the point I was trying to make is that you don't need LR to live happily with a RAW workflow.
+1. I'm an LR fanboi - but I know many people who won't touch it, and some who won't even touch anything with Adobe on the cover. Haven't seen them suffering.
Quote from: Reinardina on January 15, 2014, 07:53:57 PM
And this is probably a very stupid question, but what does ACR stand for? I know it as a rifle, but as you do the shooting with a camera, I doubt you are talking about that.
Adobe Camera Raw - it is Adobes Raw conversion software and is at the heart of all of its photo import and manipulation software.
Quote from: Andrew on January 15, 2014, 08:09:35 PM
Quote from: Reinardina on January 15, 2014, 07:53:57 PM
And this is probably a very stupid question, but what does ACR stand for? I know it as a rifle, but as you do the shooting with a camera, I doubt you are talking about that.
Adobe Camera Raw - it is Adobes Raw conversion software and is at the heart of all of its photo import and manipulation software.
Thank you. Very obvious once you know it!
Quote from: Reinardina on January 15, 2014, 07:53:57 PM
H, which of the Topaz products do you use? I have Adjust and B&W effects, which I love..
I have acquired most of the Topaz set over the years. I have Adjust and Black and White, as you do. I use Remask from time to time whenever I want to do a cut out - I find it a lot better than the alternatives. The full list is:
Adjust
Black and White
Clarity
Clean
Denoise (now outclassed by the both the LR adjustment and the Nik plugin)
Detail
In Focus
Lens Effex
PhotoFX Lab
Star Effex
A few of these were impulse purchases of special offers. I haven't even run Star Effex yet :o
I really do need to play with the FX Lab a lot more. I've barely scratched the surface on that one, but it does look really powerful as it enables you to click on an image on 500px (for example) and it will automatically load that look onto the image you are working on. It also has layers (I really struggle with software that doesn't have layers :uglystupid2:) and masking as well as loads of controls similar to the develop module in Lightroom.
H, thanks for that! I bought Remask in the last 'sale' but haven't mastered the subtleties yet. The really difficult bit (hair for instance) is very demanding on my eyes.
I was tempted to buy the whole lot, when it was on offer last time, but resisted. It's all wonderful stuff to play with, but I want/need to learn RAW converting before I buy more software.
I'm in a bit of a quandry here. Having always shot in RAW can anyone tell me the difference between working in RAW and working in Jpeg. When I read about all the different software and gizmos available I get confused and think perhaps I'm missing out on something. :(
Surely if what ever you have works, or you can work it to your satisfaction, carry on using it. After all if your image has nothing to commend it in the first place, whatever you shoot in is irrelevant.
I attended a demonstration of digital manipulation Tuesday evening and I was amazed at the route the 'demonstrator' took to arrive at his final image. There must be a few permutations on how to use the software to end up with what you plan because the way he went was nowhere near the way I would go, a bit like going to Paris via Glasgow starting out from London, if you get my drift. :o
Quote from: ABERS on January 16, 2014, 10:30:55 AM
There must be a few permutations on how to use the software to end up with what you plan because the way he went was nowhere near the way I would go, a bit like going to Paris via Glasgow starting out from London, if you get my drift. :o
It was cheaper going that way! :uglystupid2: :legit:
Hi Abers,
I'm not certain, but I think jpgs can only carry 8 bit per channel colour, while your camera can save 12 or 14 (possibly more?) bpc in a RAW file. A raw editor should be able to use all those bits and output as a Tiff or another format which can preserve them.
I've sometimes seen jpg files which have been colour, contrast etc adjusted till their histograms resemble combs and banding is evident in skies etc. which I thought was due to the lower bpc. Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect that editing the original RAW file (if there was one) would have avoided this.
Simon
Alan, there really is not that much difference in day to day terms in editing RAW and jpgs. With RAW you can keep the original image without thinking about first saving a master copy (but I usually only work on a virtual or duplicate anyway - I just think it's a good habit), and also with RAW the image, because it has a lot more colour information - a much higher bit depth, is able to take more extreme editing without showing signs of degradation. This gives you a lot more leeway in editing the shadows and highlights for example. You may also notice that colour gradients in RAW images are much smoother. In 8 bit images a graduated blue sky, for example, may appear to have bands of colour rather than an overall smooth change.
As for getting where you want to go with an edit there are probably more ways to a result than there are spots on a leopard, many of them equally good.
Quote from: ABERS on January 16, 2014, 10:30:55 AM
I'm in a bit of a quandry here. Having always shot in RAW can anyone tell me the difference between working in RAW and working in Jpeg. When I read about all the different software and gizmos available I get confused and think perhaps I'm missing out on something. :(
Surely if what ever you have works, or you can work it to your satisfaction, carry on using it. After all if your image has nothing to commend it in the first place, whatever you shoot in is irrelevant.
I attended a demonstration of digital manipulation Tuesday evening and I was amazed at the route the 'demonstrator' took to arrive at his final image. There must be a few permutations on how to use the software to end up with what you plan because the way he went was nowhere near the way I would go, a bit like going to Paris via Glasgow starting out from London, if you get my drift. :o
Alan, if it works - stick with it... JPG has its place, as does RAW & as does TIFF or DNG.
Some one was good enough to point out how to use a keyboard combibation to select the eraser option in the brush tool in LR.
My response was "why not just click on the eraser icon? Or is that the lazy way?" I asked.
An amused reply came back that they were just trying to make people aware of keyboard controls.
Quote from: Andrew on January 16, 2014, 12:53:00 PM
Some one was good enough to point out how to use a keyboard combibation to select the eraser option in the brush tool in LR.
My response was "why not just click on the eraser icon? Or is that the lazy way?" I asked.
An amused reply came back that they were just trying to make people aware of keyboard controls.
In the days before mice and PCs only had a 10mb hard drive, shortcut keys was all you had. The trouble was Wordperfect used a different setup to Lotus 1-2-3. To help you out you had a card that fitted over the Function keys with the shortcuts listed, when changing from Lotus 1-2-3 to Wordperfect you swapped the card. :o
My RAW was definitely helped along by my first dSLR only shooting RAW - and haven't shot JPG since that day. I'm sure if my shooting life revolved around the aseptic conditions of a studio, I'd be shooting JPGs as everything can be totally controlled - but I shoot outside and, in the main, it's rapidly moving subjects in any direction under changeable weather - so RAW helps towards getting as good a start point as possible. Never batch process for the same reason; each shot is nudged towards what I consider to be an optimum final image (which may be for a website, news, press release, print, a canvas or the side of a vehicle/marquee)
Can't add anything to the 'what's better' debate as yet, but I can tell those who are considering giving it a go, that I am struggling.
There is a lot to take in and understand. Some things slip into place without too many problems, but others take some practice, experience and good eyesight, which I sadly lack.
I hope to get there though, in the end. Or at least, I hope to get a lot further.
I`ve always shot raw with my dslr since going digital. You`re gla of it when shooting a wedding in full sun and everything is moving fast as it gives you more leaway when you don`t quite hit a key shot quite right. That said I wouldn`t be a slave to it. I shoot jpeg with my compact because raw is too slow on it ( now wondering if my current one does it) and it`s the dof possibilities rather than exposure benefits that I miss from my dslr
I shoot Raw plus Fine Jpeg, but hardly use the Raw as the Jpegs are good enough. :tup:
I pretty much shoot in RAW all the time, even with my little Panasonic. I don't tend to need lots of frames in a short period of time. The compact is slowish, but the DSLR will do 7 frames a second if need be. I've only used that feature once in the last year as far as I can recall.
Some really interesting points here. Given me plenty to think about!
As it happens its been one of those weeks and I've still not even touched the camera. Hopefully that will change over the weekend as I'm looking forward to having a go with this.
Thanks again.
I actually managed to get out for a while with the camera today. Tried to open the RAW files but they wouldn't open?? :doh: Didn't have much time as I had to go out to work so I'll have another go tomorrow when I have a bit more time.
Fingers crossed !
Hmm - maybe you do need this DNG converter after all: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5694
Or maybe you just need to choose Elements to be the default for that file type. Next time you want to open your RAW file, right-click it, choose Open With and tick the default box.
Simon.
Mine opened automatically.
I use E11, and a Panasonic Lumix G5 I bought last year.
Quote from: Jediboy on January 19, 2014, 02:08:58 AM
I actually managed to get out for a while with the camera today. Tried to open the RAW files but they wouldn't open?? :doh: Didn't have much time as I had to go out to work so I'll have another go tomorrow when I have a bit more time.
Fingers crossed !
What camera and PS version?
I'm using a Nikon D300 and PSE9.
Thanks for the link Simon. I'll have a look at that.
I feel a bit if google time coming on.
Last night's camera club speaker was a professional photographer. His slide show of Greece was stunning - all deep blue skies, solid red roofs, white walls etc. Not a trace of burnt out whites or lost shadow detail, no trace of banding even in those incredible skies. Well chosen composition and framing too. He didn't say what camera he used, but told us it allows a choice fo aspect rations from square, 4:3, 5:7, 16:9 and so on. He said he shoots only jpgs - not raw, with exposure set to automatic though he does very occasionally use exposure compensation, and he normally does no processing at all on his images (though on one he had cloned out a piece of rubbish).
If you're skilled enough to get everything perfect at the taking stage maybe you don't need raw....
Simon
Quote from: Jediboy on January 19, 2014, 05:22:40 PM
I'm using a Nikon D300 and PSE9.
Thanks for the link Simon. I'll have a look at that.
I feel a bit if google time coming on.
ACR supported the D300 in version 5.5 and version 9 of PSE supports ACR 6.3 (if you update).
Thats a fair point Simon.
I downloaded the DNG converter, but can't seem to open any photos with it????? :uglystupid2:
Quote from: donoreo on January 21, 2014, 02:44:56 PM
Quote from: Jediboy on January 19, 2014, 05:22:40 PM
I'm using a Nikon D300 and PSE9.
Thanks for the link Simon. I'll have a look at that.
I feel a bit if google time coming on.
ACR supported the D300 in version 5.5 and version 9 of PSE supports ACR 6.3 (if you update).
Thanks Donoreo. I will have a go at that later. Is it easy?
Cheers.
Jediboy - The converter cannot open any files. All it does is make a new file, which is a copy of your RAW file in DNG format. You then need to opne the DNG file in your RAW software.
Simon
Ah. Cheers Simon.
So much to learn! :doh:
Yes, Help - > Updates. It will download and install.