Question about DSLR cameras... (1 Viewer)

[captain_amazing]

So, I just got chewed out by a Director at work because she did a photo shoot and found that all of the images weren't JPEGs but rather CR2. I had last used the camera and changes the settings to save images in raw format. My understanding is that, if you have a DSLR, you should be shooting in raw for the quality, as it would be somewhat analogous to having an HDTV without HD service. Not all folks who use the camera have access to software (that they know of) that can work with raw images.

My question is, should one with a DSLR be shooting in raw or does it really not matter all that much?

 

[Henry Ford]

If you're going to use the photos professionally, I say shoot in raw.

 

[[icon]]

Raw allows for much easier post processing flexibility, but it's not the end of the world to shoot in TIF or JPG for most uses.

But Raw is definitely best.

 

[Sarnoff]

So, I just got chewed out by a Director at work because she did a photo shoot and found that all of the images weren't JPEGs but rather CR2. I had last used the camera and changes the settings to save images in raw format. My understanding is that, if you have a DSLR, you should be shooting in raw for the quality, as it would be somewhat analogous to having an HDTV without HD service. Not all folks who use the camera have access to software (that they know of) that can work with raw images.

My question is, should one with a DSLR be shooting in raw or does it really not matter all that much?

Ideally, one would always shoot raw so that one has full control of after-image processing and can retain an uncompressed, lossless, master image. Resaving a JPEG is bad, in general. You really only want to save as a JPEG once, at the end of whatever image editing process you're going to use.

However, one does want to shoot JPEG in some specific situations. If file size & fitting enough images on the card is a concern, then JPEG is a compromise. Also, occasionally if someone is working with a model the model will expect to take JPEG copies home with him/herself at the end of the shoot. Generally there's no time to convert all the raws to JPEG and the model won't have raw-compatible software at home.

Some cameras allow RAW+JPEG, in which both versions are saved, so the model can get their copy to go but still keeping the raw available to the photographer to edit with later.

 

[Sarnoff]

Raw allows for much easier post processing flexibility, but it's not the end of the world to shoot in TIF or JPG for most uses.

But Raw is definitely best.

TIF is lossless, JPEG is lossy. If it's a choice between those two I'd always lean TIF.

 

[[icon]]

Raw allows for much easier post processing flexibility, but it's not the end of the world to shoot in TIF or JPG for most uses.

But Raw is definitely best.

TIF is lossless, JPEG is lossy. If it's a choice between those two I'd always lean TIF.

Of course... which is why I inserted it into the discussion... I'm just saying it's not the end of the world to use those formats instead of RAW in most cases.

I've directed quite a few photo shoots in my time and we almost always shoot RAW then I ask for my finished images in TIF.

 

[Drifter]

So, I just got chewed out by a Director at work because she did a photo shoot and found that all of the images weren't JPEGs but rather CR2. I had last used the camera and changes the settings to save images in raw format. My understanding is that, if you have a DSLR, you should be shooting in raw for the quality, as it would be somewhat analogous to having an HDTV without HD service. Not all folks who use the camera have access to software (that they know of) that can work with raw images.

My question is, should one with a DSLR be shooting in raw or does it really not matter all that much?

Depends. The newest DSLRs do not need to be shot in raw like previous generations. People still tout it but it's mostly antiquated thinking and camera buff snobbery. From Ken Rockwell:

Gen 2 cameras are using the increased in-camera processing horsepower to do all these tricks. If you're wasting your time shooting raw, you will have to hope that whatever software you're using to open raw files is as smart as what Nikon is building into these cameras for free. Many off-brands of software can't do any of this.

There was never much reason for raw, and in Gen 2, even less. It's quite likely that using raw with a Gen 2 camera and most, if not all, software, will throw you back into Gen 1 quality. It's not 2006 anymore. Most raw software does not do any of the clever things, like ADR, expanded color controls or totally automatic lens corrections, that are done in-camera.