Sports Car Forum - MotorWorld.net

Sports Car Forum - MotorWorld.net (http://www.motorworld.net/forum/index.php)
-   Photography (http://www.motorworld.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=65)
-   -   JPG vs RAW (http://www.motorworld.net/forum/showthread.php?t=36452)

ae86_16v 04-11-2006 02:35 PM

JPG vs RAW
 
Which do you guys prefer? And of course why?

Fleischmann 04-11-2006 02:51 PM

I always take pics in JPEG, the file type is very universal and can be read by every graphic editor. For very high quality shots I use TIF.

sameerrao 04-11-2006 02:51 PM

Till I got the D50 last week, I didnt have the ability to do raw. I guess I'll do JPEG for some time till I get a proper handle on the camera.

With RAW, you need to process it on the computer, correct?

TNT 04-11-2006 02:52 PM

well from a computer stand point .PNG saves space but has the same quality of a .jpg

DeMoN 04-11-2006 03:46 PM

^ not exactly. It all depends in the amount of colors. If the picture has little colors, then GIF is the best, if the pic has plenty of colors, JPG and for an extremelly big amount of colors, PNG is like GIF, but with more colors than 256. GIF has only one thing better than PNG which is, it supports animatino.

They all have different algorithms on how to paint a picture so thats why each is good at it's own.

dutchmasterflex 04-11-2006 03:46 PM

I've been shooting in JPEG cause I have quite the trigger happy finger..(taking a lot of shitty shots) and because I only have one 1gb SD card.

If I had a bigger card I'd probably shoot in RAW, but then again its more time consuming to edit them on the computer too.

The ideal way to shoot raws IMO is if you're really setting up the shot. If you have the time, take a couple test shots in jpeg and once you've got the nicest settings, switch it over to RAW.

c0wb0y007 04-11-2006 05:04 PM

I used to shoot in jpeg but after having read a few looong boooring but interesting articles and after having had a discussion with a fellow photographer I discided not to shoot in jpeg anymore. A RAW-file is much better than a jpeg cause it contains much more detail ... much more detail in general ... when it comes to colors, sharpness etc ... .

I wouldn't say that a RAW-file is harder to work with in photoshop, it's just a matter what your are used to. When it comes to sharpen the image or adjusting the color balance and fixing levels -> RAW is the name of the game !!!

And I'm not talking about turning a shitty photograph into a masterpiece :) I'm talking about improving a very good picture even more. A shitty picture should get deleted immediately :D That is how I work.

RAW-format is much more versatile than jpeg, I experienced it myself last Saterday ... .

If this file format gives me better pictures than it gives me better prints as well so when you snap a nice picture you want to end up with a high-quality print as well.

You can still choose whether you prefer to shoot single RAWs or that you want to combine RAWs with jpegs with most of the DSLR on the market today.
With the D2x you can combine RAWs with jpeg(fine) best of both worlds of course :P

When you are shooting RAW, I suggest a 512mb card is the absolute minimum. 1 & 2 Gig cards are nice, but I will go for a 4 or even a 8 gig card in the future.

If anyone of you wants to read an interesting article about this matter, then "the big squeeze" in the NikonPro magazine is good for starters.
Or go to google and type "jpeg vs raw" :P 8) :D


No matter what ... just enjoy photography :wink:


Cheers

DeMoN 04-11-2006 10:34 PM

my dsc-t1 doesnt shoot raw lol.

ae86_16v 04-11-2006 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sameerrao
With RAW, you need to process it on the computer, correct?

Well it is just more versatile so you could do (process) more with the picture w/o destroying it.

You don't have to process it. . .

nthfinity 04-12-2006 01:54 AM

well, for now... i've been shooting in jpg; but when it comes time for the costom shoots, and such... raw will be the name of the game. my experience editing raw vs. jpg is basically the same... only my computer is old and slow... so it does take longer to edit the CR2 files :?

saadie 04-12-2006 03:19 AM

jpg for me ...

TT 04-12-2006 05:06 AM

jpg.. raw is just to heavy and I shoot too many pics (and don't want to carry 10 GB of memory ;)).

MartijnGizmo 04-12-2006 05:41 AM

I always shoot RAW. It gives me more dynamic reach and lets me adjust the whitebalance on my computer (lossless!). Why would I let my camera calculate a JPG, when my computer can do it better? :)

Darkel 04-12-2006 12:52 PM

Interesting, I never used RAW so far but I think I'm gonna give it a try next time :) My CF being fast enough it's no real problem.

dutchmasterflex 04-12-2006 01:59 PM

Bottom line, if you want the highest quality, RAW is the way to go. If you want to do quick multiple action shots, JPEG will be faster to write to the card allowing more frames per second.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:51 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.