Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Computers and Software
Any reason to shoot in RAW if I don't have PS/LR?etc?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 524653" data-attributes="member: 12496"><p>No, not really. To shoot JPG, first we must set proper values for white balance and color profile (like Vivid) in the camera. Then those settings are applied to the JPG we shoot. These settings probably vary (or should vary) for each type of shot situation.</p><p></p><p>Those settings are NOT in the raw file, so we don't get them in raw. We need not even worry about those settings in the camera (exposure yes, but not color, not yet). Raw assumes we will decide on white balance and color profile later, in the raw software. This is called Editing... but it primarily only means applying camera type settings at that time, after we can see it, and be much smarter about what it actually needs, and see what actually does help it. We can optionally also correct exposure then too. It is all real simple to do, fast, easy, and good.</p><p></p><p>You can set defaults for white balance and color profile in the raw software too, like done in the camera, and that result should be similar. But the beauty of raw is seeing it first before deciding what it needs. Many of them will be better with something a bit different. Assuming you care. If we don't care, and if otherwise satisfied with the JPGs from the camera, then why bother with raw? Raw is about caring. It's just that the more we know, the less satisfied we are, so we shoot Raw instead. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> But raw is a philosophy, NOT just a setting.</p><p></p><p>But to the second part, yes, if you want better images, shoot raw. We get real good at it (to be real fast). Just a few seconds per picture (at most... or in many cases we can do many similar pictures in the same one click). </p><p></p><p>We have go through all of them just to see them first time, and in this same pass, if not quite right, we simply just fix them. The looking takes the time, not the clicking. The clicking does not add much time, but it adds substantial quality.</p><p></p><p>See <a href="http://www.scantips.com/lights/shootraw.html" target="_blank">Why shoot Raw?</a></p><p><a href="http://www.scantips.com/lights/shootraw.html" target="_blank"></a></p><p><a href="http://www.scantips.com/lights/shootraw.html" target="_blank"></a></p><p><a href="http://www.scantips.com/lights/shootraw.html" target="_blank"></a></p><p><a href="http://www.scantips.com/lights/shootraw.html" target="_blank"></a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 524653, member: 12496"] No, not really. To shoot JPG, first we must set proper values for white balance and color profile (like Vivid) in the camera. Then those settings are applied to the JPG we shoot. These settings probably vary (or should vary) for each type of shot situation. Those settings are NOT in the raw file, so we don't get them in raw. We need not even worry about those settings in the camera (exposure yes, but not color, not yet). Raw assumes we will decide on white balance and color profile later, in the raw software. This is called Editing... but it primarily only means applying camera type settings at that time, after we can see it, and be much smarter about what it actually needs, and see what actually does help it. We can optionally also correct exposure then too. It is all real simple to do, fast, easy, and good. You can set defaults for white balance and color profile in the raw software too, like done in the camera, and that result should be similar. But the beauty of raw is seeing it first before deciding what it needs. Many of them will be better with something a bit different. Assuming you care. If we don't care, and if otherwise satisfied with the JPGs from the camera, then why bother with raw? Raw is about caring. It's just that the more we know, the less satisfied we are, so we shoot Raw instead. :) But raw is a philosophy, NOT just a setting. But to the second part, yes, if you want better images, shoot raw. We get real good at it (to be real fast). Just a few seconds per picture (at most... or in many cases we can do many similar pictures in the same one click). We have go through all of them just to see them first time, and in this same pass, if not quite right, we simply just fix them. The looking takes the time, not the clicking. The clicking does not add much time, but it adds substantial quality. See [URL="http://www.scantips.com/lights/shootraw.html"]Why shoot Raw? [/URL] [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Computers and Software
Any reason to shoot in RAW if I don't have PS/LR?etc?
Top