Raw -????????

Ok i have millions of question to keep the Beginners Forum going for a thousand years :)

I know that shooting in RAW is the way to go

I have NEF RAW

And

Nef Raw and Jpeg basic

When i have returned from a day out and download my Nef Raw and Jpeg basic files no problem, i get he picture plus

an NEF blank document.

When i shoot RAW i get blank docs that the computer does not open, it directs me to the web for opening services

(not good)

So in short RAW is a pain in the bottom for me, it means i have to import everything into Lightroom just so i can see

all the pictures i have taken on the day.

Can someone explain the difference between the two options and really explain the benifits of RAW.

I am shooting RAW because i read it is the right thing to do, but i don't really know why!

I am at the very first stages of photography, so please keep it simple.

Regards

Simon

Raw is the right thing to do because it has more information than a JPEG, so you can manipulate the image more before you produce your JPEG. Examples are adjusting white balance, changing curves,levels,contrast etc... By the time you are doing this with the JPEG it has already lost all but 8 bits of brightness information per channel, however the camera records 12 bits or more, so if you make the adjustments to the RAW file then produce the JPEG you have a better result.

Someone else can point you to software to let you view your RAW files more easily. I don't use windows, but I have heard that there is a plug in thing to let you view raws similarly to JPEGs.

Picasa can let you view and edit (up to a certain extent) your RAW files as if they were JPEGs.

It's not Photoshop, and I cant figure out how to cut back on highlights, but it does a darn good job for the price (FREE!!!).

You will find the plugin Daniel mentioned over here: http://www.microsoft.com/prophoto/downloads/codecs.aspx

<br> look around a bit around. there might be more interesting downloads for you.

<br><br>Good luck with your photography!

Problem #1 - download Picasa at picasa.google.com. You can download your pics, both RAW and JPG and view them with this.

RAW is uncompressed, so you get all of the light and color information that your camera sensor captured. JPEG is compressed, so it throws away some of that information and you can't recover it.

To maximize your ability to manipulate light and color information after you download, you need RAW. If you're just taking pics to reduce in size and post online casually, you probably don't need to take RAW. If you always get the right exposure with correct color, you might not need RAW. But, if you intend to shoot under less than ideal conditions (bright light, dark shadows), most people need to adjust these things now and then.

Both Picasa and Adobe Lightroom handle RAW non-destructively. That means that whatever changes you make to the RAW file do no affect the original file. Your light and color information are always there. With JPG, every time you save it, it compresses the photo a bit more and throws away more of this information. You may end up with a very poor final result if you edit JPG and save alot. If you edit most of the stuff in RAW and just export to JPG once, you'll have a better quality final result.

Hope this helps.

Fastone image viewer is a very good RAW viewer and basic editor. Another good starting place is to download and install Picasa. Once you get used to it RAW really is that much better to work with. All it is, basically,is the image seen by the camera's sensor with no processing.

Both of the above software items are free.

Simon,

Shooting in RAW is not always the best thing to do. In order to get the best from RAW you must be willing to put in

some time doing post processing and editing on your computer. Some people don't want to do this, which is fine, and in

that case JPEG is probably a better option. The reason for this is when you take a photo using JPEG, the camera

records the scene and makes several important decisions automatically - things like, sharpening, White Balance and

exposure are all set and once the photo is taken you have limited control over changing these things. With RAW

however, the camera doesn't make any decisions for you and these settings can be changed once you get home and get

your images onto your computer. RAW file is exactly what the camera saw with no adjustments made. If you are just

starting with photography and don't want to be spending a lot of time in front of your computer just yet then there is

absolutely nothing wrong with shooting in JPEG for the time being and moving onto RAW later on.

From your comment I'm guessing that you have Adobe Lightroom? If so, and you want to shoot in RAW then it really

isn't all that difficult to convert them. Other people have got different opinions on this but I convert all of my Canon RAW

(CR2) files to the Adobe DNG format which can be done at the same time as importing to Lightroom. Every camera manufacturer has their own RAW file format (Canon have CR2, Nikon have NEF etc) but they are all basically the same

thing. DNG is Adobe's version of the RAW file and I just like using it as it means I have one less step in my workflow.

Thankyou all for this, very helpful

One thing that i still would like to know.

RAW and jpeg basic/ or RAW

These are options on my camera, i can view RAW and jpeg basic without any trouble. When you have all finished with your post production.

How then do you save the finished picture for best results?

Hi,

here is the link to a good article on this subject in the "Learning" section of this site.

http://www.photo.net/learn/raw/

Personally I just use RAW, and use the camera's LCD to check for camera shake, out of focus points, and composition/framing, and checking the histogram for over or under exposed shots. I worry about WB, saturation and contrast during post processing. Picasa can save your files as a JPEG. Just go to the File->Save As... part. I think Lightroom can too, I just haven't used it yet (I use Canon DPP to fix up my RAW files, then use Picasa/GIMP for more drastic edits).

I used to shoot in JPEG only until I realized that there comes a point that I can't recover enough detail in JPEG and had to switch to RAW. If you shoot RAW+JPEG it can save time on your part if your in-camera settings (contrast, saturation, WB) are already OK for your tastes. It saves you a lot of time, and it gives you a nice idea if you're headed in the right direction in terms of getting the most out of your shot. And if you do screw up on your shot, you can try to salvage it using RAW.

I do warn you that RAW+JPEG eats up a lot of storage fast. So you have to set your compromises with regards to 1. Time spent processing your pics and 2. Storage.

paulo quote

I do warn you that RAW+JPEG eats up a lot of storage fast. So you have to set your compromises with regards to 1. Time spent processing your pics and 2. Storage.

Yes i found that out recently Paulo, 300 pics filled the card that should have stored 1000. Thanks for link John i will check it out.

I shoot JPEG exclusively. If you shoot a proper photograph in the first place, all of that 'editing' (fixing) wouldn't need

to be done.

RAW files are not printable, so the file has to be converted to JPEG or TIFF anyway.

The Adobe people have a huge investment in getting you to shoot RAW (NEF, etc.), can you guess why ??

Bill P.

"I shoot JPEG exclusively. If you shoot a proper photograph in the first place, all of that 'editing' (fixing) wouldn't need to be done."

On the surface that is a very logical sounding and often repeated statement, just like "Why do I need to lean algebra? I'll never need this."

The fact is: JPEG is a compressed file format and just like MP3 audio files; the output is lossy, meaning that information from the original source, (in this case what the what the camera's photo cell captured) is discarded and of course anyone who doesn't understand it won't miss what you never got to see.

Working with RAW files is not editing and fixing, it's simply doing the same thing the camera can do on it's own in a generic default manner. Shooting in and working with RAW allows one to choose for themselves and produce an image closer to what the photographer saw in the first place and attempted to capture rather than just settle for the camera's one default output.

What may cause some to come to the conclusion that shooting in JPEG exclusively is the way to go is that so many folks assume that converting RAW files to JPEG is the next logical step, so why bother with RAW in the first place. I agree; why work with RAW only to compress it down to a lossy, lower quality JPEG image file.

Converting RAW to a non compressed TIFF file format is the way to go for those who want to preserve all of the effort they invested working with the RAW file.

When it comes right down to it; it's a personal choice to do less work and save storage space or do more work and save quality with less storage space.

Want to thank Lannert for that link

http://www.microsoft.com/prophoto/downloads/codecs.aspx

Now i can open and view Raw Files with windows.

Cheers