Why should I shoot digital surrounded by RAW? I don't fully understand it...What is the benefit?
I don't fully understand it...What is the benefit?
Answers:
shooting digital surrounded by raw take up a TON of memory- if you aren't a professional, or you're not going to blow the pictures up to a REALLY large (poster) size- it's surplus to requirements. We have taken photos that are NOT contained by raw, and we own blown them up to 11 X 20, and still gotten GREAT shots-
Raw isn't necessary for your average photographer.
It give you the ultimate detail contained by your pictures. The camera grabs the picture and lays it down contained by memory and does nothing within terms of compression. Thus it make huge files, but ones that give you adjectives the choices in post processing.
It is an uncompressed report, saves adjectives the original information, allows you to glibly make change, and my all time favorite: you can fix a total set of similar pictures at one time... but unless you have a software that you can use surrounded by post production (Lightroom or Photoshop are great), it isn't necessary.
Ken Rockwell have a great article on RAW vs JPG: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm
From Digital Preview a industrial answer I never shoot is Raw because to me the Jpeg's from my nikon look great. I let the camera do the processing inside for me. I said this already and get thumbs down??
"The only drawback is that RAW formats differ between camera manufacturer, and even between cameras, so dedicated software provided by the businessman has to be used. Furthermore, vent and processing RAW files is much slower than JPEG or TIFF files. To address this issue, some cameras are offering the option to shoot contained by RAW and JPEG at the same time. As cameras become faster and memory cards cheaper, this prospect has no longer ceremonial or storage issues. It allows you to organize and expurgate your images contained by a faster way next to regular software using the JPEGs. But you retain the option to process contained by RAW those critical images or descriptions with problems (e.g. white symmetry or lost shadow and highlight detail). Another trend is that third delegation image editing and viewing software packages are becoming RAW compatible near most popular camera brands and models. An example is Adobe Photoshop CS. However, as stated in my Photoshop CS review, the instrument Photoshop processes RAW files can be different from the track the camera manufacturer's software does it and not all settings may be recognized".
The main benefit is, that it contails adjectives the information about the photo, more than the compressed jpg. Information which may be lost contained by a jpg file, due to over or underexposure, will remain here, in a RAW database, and in post processing you may know how to salvage an incorrectly exposed photol.
Another benefit is, jpg files lose information with respectively saving and beside each transformation made to the photo. RAW files retain all their information, untouched, you can work on the file as much as you preference wihout damaging the record.
RAW images are unprocessed photo. Most RAW formats are actually smaller than tif directory. The main positive aspect of shooting RAW is that it allows for full control of processing with no characteristic loss in your software. I set my camera to shoot RAW and high-ranking quality jpeg at indistinguishable time. If the jpeg looks fine, I keep it. I own had some shoots that required intense work contained by the software to develop properly. I know jpeg is a lossy format if you make change and save, but if I don't requirement any changes it works resourcefully. Because of this control, RAW allows for more professional results and a wider range of option when developing. For every day shooting, it's unwanted. If you wanted to use the photograph for commercial purposes, RAW would be the choice. Using RAW is more like using motion picture, due to the time you spend working with the figure.
The benefit is flexibility and error tolerance.
If you shoot RAW, you can adjust the white balance in need penalty. You can adjust the curves and exposure near a lot more latitude. You can control sharpness and contrast.
By comparison, near in-camera jpeg, once the image is written as a jpeg, you are tied to that print. If you can consistently nail the white be a foil for, exposure and sharpness, then jpeg is adjectives you need. But most family need the flexibility to form some adjustments to their photograph, which is where RAW have an advantage over jpeg.
Example: You shoot a daylight scene next to the white balance set to indoor/tungsten. The shots come out adjectives blue in jpeg and no amount of fixing will rest the right colors because jpeg throws out data surrounded by writing the jpeg. Had you shot in RAW, you could smoothly change the white symmetry to the correct one without cost.
Another example: You take a photo and hold jpeg quality set to "Basic", resulting surrounded by jpeg artifacts in the statue. Had you taken the image contained by RAW, it wouldn't matter.
Third example: you embezzle an image contained by jpeg and there's a color aberration. In RAW, this aberration can be eliminated. In jpeg, software reduce it, but not completely.
Thus, you can see where, despite the larger wallet size, the additional flexibility can come surrounded by handy. In fact, masses people use bigger memory cards and shoot RAW+simultaneous jpeg, so that they can own the best of both worlds: a file that can be instantly used and a RAW profile to get maximum adjustment flexibility if needed. Taking the picture surrounded by RAW format means that the camera will store the depiction exactly as it was capture, with no internal processing, no quality-degrading statue compression, etc. The main benefits are and so in lingo of image aspect and the ability to variety stronger image corrections up to that time the image characteristic starts to be seriously degraded.
In DSLR cameras, the dynamic range is one of the most high-status advantages of the RAW format, because these cameras usually have much more dynamic stock, which the 12 - 14 bit RAW image can fully occupation, while 8 bit JPEG images can't.
For point & shoot cameras, the most important advantage is contained by avoiding the (usually too aggressive) internal image processing, so as to use the more sophisticated processing available within programs such as Adobe Camera Raw / Lightroom, CaptureONE, SilkyPix, Bibble, etc. For example, most Panasonic cameras perform a far too aggressive internal pandemonium reduction processing, that tend to destroy too much detail; by using RAW, you ensure that the camera won't try to remove rumpus like that, and you'll be capable of decide exactly how much (and how) to cut back on the noise. And one and the same applies to sharpening, contrast, saturation, de-mosaicing, gamma correction, white balance correction, etc.
In short, RAW allows you to squeeze every bit of the doll quality your camera have. And there are several cameras out within for which the difference between their JPEGs and even a basic RAW processing, is moderately visible.