Transitioning from JPEG to Raw

[jdub]

I photographed weddings last summer as a second shooter all in jpeg. I just

cashed in a ton of memory cards at a great sale at Costco with hopes of

transitioning totally to raw. Should I take it slow and just shoot ceremony

shots in raw? I'm a little nervous about the processing part...I don't have

PS yet and have been editing with another program. With the wedding next

weekend should I stick to what I know? Thoughts and opinions much

appreciated. Thanks :)

[picturesque]

You don't need PS to develop RAW files. You should be able to use the RAW processor that came with your camera. Yes, start slow, shoot only the formals in RAW or ceremony, or just a part of the wedding so you aren't overwhelmed with the sheer number of files. Then work your way up.

[jdub]

Thanks, Nadine :)

[conraderb]

no need for PS. if canon, use canon DPP. or buy photomechanic, which is the fastest file browser I have ever seen and well worth the $100-$200 price.

 

BUT if you are concerned about how to handle a raw file, then shoot one and try it out! if you are concerned about how your computer will handle that quantity - no problem. just process 50-100 images at a time if you need to, after doing the initial edit.

[anner]

I suggest trying Lightroom... it's one of the best overall processing and editing tools now available- and the support and free tutorials available online for the program are growing every day. You can still get it for $199 if you buy before April 31st (I think) after that it goes up to $299.

[bruce_rubenstein___nyc]

The RAW software that comes with Canons is ok. The software that comes with Nikons (Picture Perfect) is a steaming pile and not worth loading on your computer. The Nikon software is so awful that I refuse to give Nikon another dime to pay for soemthing useful that should have come with the camera. I tried out a few trial versions of RAW converters, and wound up buying Lightroom. I'ts quick and easy to do adjustments and the defaults are pretty good.

[anner]

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/

 

There's a free 30-day trial so you can see if it's something that will be useful for you.

[kelvinphoto - arlington, t]

let me ask you a few questions.

 

1. what is wrong with your process of shooting jpeg?

 

2. Why do you need transition to RAW?

 

3. Do you think RAW is better than jpeg, or does your client complain about your jpeg file?

 

My recommendation is stick to what work best for you. There is no way better than the other. It is the techniques within each process that is better. not raw or jpeg.

 

If you want to learn how RAW work, then shoot JPEG + RAW to see what work best for you.

 

gl & hs.

[annealmasy]

Blow out a highlight on a JPG file. Then shoot the exact same image as a RAW file. You'll find

that you can recover most blown highlights in RAW, but can't in JPG. That's what convinced

me to shoot RAW, anyway.

 

We process in LightRoom. PS is great for the extra stuff, but LR is fantastic.

[stephen dohring]

Listen to the Anne's... lightroom, lightroom, lightroom. In case that wasn't clear - get lightroom - best $200.00 I ever spent in photography.

[jdub]

Hey everyone, thank you so much for all the great responses...and so quick too! I just got a Digital Photo Pro magazine subscription and it had an entire article on Adobe Lightroom...I am definately making that purchase (Thanks, Anne for your recommendation on that one. I read an earlier thread on that) Kevin, I am making the switch because I am wanting a more professional look to my photos that I know is lacking...and it seems like RAW will give me more options with fixing white balance and lighting issues. I've been doing a lot of reading on the pros and cons of RAW vs. JPEG. So, I'm going to give it a shot and try it out this week.

Conrad, I will definately check out Canon DPP and Photomechanic. Have you tried Lightroom and can you compare? Thanks everyone! There is so much to learn, I appreciate the feedback :)

[ellis_vener_photography]

The best way to fix lighting issues is to learn howto light.

Play with your lights: move them around try different kinds of modifiers. Study photographs

you like, try to figure out how and why they used light. It's not that difficult, it's only

photography.

 

I also firmly second the choice of Lightroom. there are loads of free tutorials and advice

either in or linked from http://www.lightroom-news.com. I especially like Sean's tutorials and

MArtin Evening's book.

[mike_hodson]

Once you find a good software and workflow for RAW...you will never want to shoot JPEG again. Memory is cheaper and cheaper every day as well.

 

Good Luck.

[kaiyen]

This is an interesting thread, as compared to a similar one in, I think, the digital darkroom forum. There, I was given strong advice that, for Nikon shooters, using Capture NX and Bridge is the way to go. Capture's RAW conversion is just the best out there if everything is set up right for Nikon NEF files.

 

Here, there's a lot of recommendations for Lightroom. I think this highlights the different nature of wedding photography. Lightroom was _built_ for folks like wedding photographers, who generate a lot of digital images, need to sort, catalog, and edit them quickly. RAW conversion might not be as good, but it's more than "good enough."

 

Interesting.

 

allan

[michael_ziegler2]

If you shoot with Canon then use RAW+JPEG wnich is an optional setup. Don't know if that is available in Nikon.

[dnmullaney]

I agree with the negative postings about Nikon's RAW programs. I bought Capture NX, but thankfully downloaded a trial version 1st. After a few days, I brought the un-opened software back for a refund.

 

I use PS CS2 with Bridge [and find it easy] and found Capture NX to be very un-intuitive.

[bakarichavanu]

I give a plug also to Lightroom (or Apple's Aperture) for handling RAW. And yes, shoot RAW.

You might as well have all the control you can get. I used think JPEG was enough, but unless

you're really good at setting WB and exposure effectively on a shoot, you may lose some

good shots using JPEG. Yes, RAW takes up more room your hard drives and you have to

convert those files to JPEG, but in using Lightroom or Aperture, their batching processing

features can save you time and you can more than often gain back parts of images that you

would lose using JPEG. Ever tried correct WB in a JPEG file? Too many steps are involved. Not

so with RAW.

[m_p2]

I recently purchased a SanDisk Extreme 3, 2.0 GB card, inside it had

a license key for a full version of Capture One LE. It seems as good if not better than Canon's Digital Photo Pro. One thing I noticed is that comparing the RAW and JPEG files next to each other (from a Canon 30D) is that the RAW seem more colorful and have more resolution (I can see more detail in strands of hair for instance), and get a better JPEG by converting from the RAW file than the JPEG shot together with RAW.