RAW vs. jpeg: I didn't believe you...

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Uncle Frank, Sep 6, 2008.

  1. Here's your chance for an "I told you so".

    I've been a devout jpeg user ever since I bought my first Nikon, a Coolpix 995. Well, it didn't have RAW, just jpeg and TIFF. My next camera, the Coolpix 5700 offered RAW, but it wasn't very useful. You had to wait about 17 1/2 minutes for the camera to save a RAW file before you could take another one :Curved:.

    I bought my first dslr in 2004, but only tried shooting in RAW a couple of times. In my hands, Photoshop 7's version of ACR didn't match up to the d70's jpegs, and besides, Ken Rockwell convinced me that RAW was a waste of time. Nope, no RAW for me... until Philippe Roger convinced me to download a trial version of Lightroom 2. Yikes, suddenly I realized what I had been missing. ACR 4.5 is amazing, and I've just begun to learn how to use it. It's improved the image quality of every one of my lenses...

    102682544.gif

    made mixed light WB much easier...

    View attachment 248104

    and my d200's iso800 images are as clean as a whistle without resorting to Neat Image.

    View attachment 248105

    It feels like I just upgraded all of my gear, which has squelched any outbreak of lens or body lust... for the moment :rolleyes:.

    OK, I'll save you the effort. You told me so. :Curved:
     
  2. Commodorefirst

    Commodorefirst Admin/Moderator Administrator

    May 1, 2005
    Missouri
    Frank, I am one who never said you should switch, and I still firmly believe that some folks shouldn't switch, I am glad you did, you are to good a photog to not do so, enjoy!

    I remember the year well, 2005, that was my last JPG year for most of my work, Seems so long ago, but was only three years.

    I moved to raw with the D200. D70 and before JPG, I still even today, every once in a while, do some quick JPGS, even with the D3 to output to someone right on the spot.

    But I have tallied near 200,000 shots in the past 6 years of digital, and I bet only about 40,000 are JPGS, the rest were raw,
     

  3. So, you gonna sell that overpriced pro glass now that the fog has lifted and get some cheaper stuff that will still give you the same quality as your lowly jpgs?????:wink::confused::biggrin:
     
  4. I shot RAW after a few weeks of going digital and never looked back. That was 3.5 years ago.
     
  5. I remember so well riding in the car one day with Rich Gibson enroute to a shoot and the topic of RAW came up. He asked if I shot RAW and I said, "um, no...." He said to me that day, "you should try it, and once you start shooting RAW you won't want to go back to jpg." Well, it took a few more months before I finally did take the plunge -- and guess what? Rich was absolutely right! :smile:

    Glad you've discovered the joys and benefits of shooting RAW!
     
  6. I don't think so... :confused:.

    Is that the way it's supposed to work?
     
  7. :biggrin:

    Frank, I'm glad you finally are in the right track.

    So there's one less topic to discuss in our next meal?
     
  8. Hey Frank, I'm glad I told you so! :rolleyes::wink::biggrin:
     

  9. Nah, lens lust strikes just as hard in the RAW!!:eek::eek:

    Now, if could do in raw just half of what you do in jpg with plastic wrap on the end of a cardboard tube, I'd be a very happy camper!!! You've always been an inspiration!
     
  10. Thats what so great about photography/art we all have our own take on it.
    I am glad it is working out for you and RAW has it's benefits forsure. I find
    JPEG is alot of fun and for me once that shutter button is pressed photography ends.
    But thats just me.

    http://dwayneoakes.zenfolio.com

    Take care Dwayne Oakes
     
  11. Not to worry, Phil. Philippe and I will find something else to argue about :wink:.
     
  12. Then you miss all those fun hours in front of the computer!

    But from the looks of the photos in your gallery you don't need to. Very nice.
     
  13. You're much too kind. The only thing I excel at is enthusiasm, which my wife attributes to incurable immaturity :redface:.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 6, 2008
  14. True story, Dwayne. The deal maker for me was when I realized the power of batch processing in Lightroom 2. Believe it or not, shooting RAW is actually saving me time.
     
  15. Rob T

    Rob T

    870
    Aug 27, 2008
    SoCal
    This is why I haven't made the full blown switch to RAW. I don't want to spend that much time on the computer, and JPG's seem to be much easier to work with.

    I probably need to try LR 2.
     
  16. I've actually thought of RAW as the "cheater's way." :redface: If your WB isn't quite right, or exposure needs a tweak......>VERY simple to do in RAW. With JPG, you bought it and paid for it. I've always been rather in awe of pure JPG shooters, I'm just not that good, and often make minor tweaks of exposure and/or WB. :redface: :smile:
     
  17. Mine says the same too, as do my kids and many of my students! Though they they put it in slightly different terms--something like--are you going to be like this when you grow up?

    Maybe in a couple, when I hit 60! :wink:
     
  18. Good to know Frank! You and Kurt have to teach me how to love Lightroom....I'm still not liking it. I do shoot raw....and have for about a year. (after protesting that jpeg was just fine the way it was, LOL!)