Why you should consider using raw files instead of JPGs

[TripleBlack]

I've been thinking about a post encouraging those interested in photography to consider learning how to create and process raw files to get the most out your camera. This evening, some spring storms rolled through and as often happens, a beautiful sunset followed. I grabbed my camera and snapped a few shots during the 5 minutes or so the sunset lasted. I pulled the photos onto my PC and noticed that in addition to the raw files I always have the camera save, I had JPGs as well. After processing the raw files as I always do, I compared them to the JPGs my camera created and thought I would post this.

So just what is a raw file? It's a file that contains all the information the camera's sensor records. When your camera is set to record JPGs, it uses an algorithm to compress the raw file dramatically, reducing the brightness levels recorded from a minimum of 4k levels (and as much at 16k levels) to 256 levels. I didn't leave out a "K", that 256 levels. A lot of other information your sensor recorded is lost as well. On my camera a raw file is about 22 mb or so. The JPGs are usually between 3 mb and 5 mb. That 4 or 5 to 1 ratio is pretty common with modern cameras.

When shooting in ideal conditions, modern cameras do a great job creating the JPGs even though they toss out 3/4ths of the original photo but when conditions are not so good and there are strong shadows and/or bright highlights, the camera isn't always smart enough to reproduce what you saw.

Here are the two versions of one shot I took of the sunset. The the original JPG the camera created is first. So much of the foreground detail was lost that it's almost a silhouette and the clouds near the sun were completely lost.



Here is a JPG I created from the raw file. I only spent 3 or 4 minutes max on this and was able to recover a lot of detail lost in the dark shadows as well as in the blown out sky around the sun.



Here's a link to an article that explains what this is a good deal more eloquently than I can.
10 Reasons Why You Should Be Shooting RAW

The photo above was edited in Adobe Lightroom. No Photoshop used. Lightroom isn't free, but there are free options for editing raw files. One I've used in the past is Raw Therapee.
RawTherapee Features

There is a learning curve but there are thousands of tutorials on Lightroom and the basics are pretty easy to master. Raw Therapee has a decent support structure too, though nowhere near what Lightroom has.

Sorry, I've rambled on here... I'll leave you with this. Think of a raw file as a negative. Set you camera to record a full raw file plus a JPG. Save the raw files like you would have saved negatives on a film camera. Even if you have no interest now, you may fine later you'd like to improve the quality of some the stuff you've taken.

Questions and comments are welcome, not that any one on here is shy.

Oh yeah, I know my shrubs need trimming.

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

I use both formats. If I'm in snapshot mode -more, I dunno, 'fun' type pics- I'm in JPG. I don't need or want to deal with a RAW file.

But if I'm out actually taking pictures with a purpose in mind? Always RAW. When I set up a strobe that's always RAW also.

All these recent Eagle pics were RAW.

For example, this shot was RAW. I needed the feather details and the ability to bring out the splash of color on the small bird. No way a JPG would capture this. And if it did, getting it out of the photo would have been a major bitch.

Hey, wait for me!!!

[carlton_fritz]

I shoot in RAW and jpg. I use the jpg for a quick upload to the net. The RAW files are saved.

[Fastguy]

Originally Posted by Thomas

I use both formats. If I'm in snapshot mode -more, I dunno, 'fun' type pics- I'm in JPG. I don't need or want to deal with a RAW file.

But if I'm out actually taking pictures with a purpose in mind? Always RAW. When I set up a strobe that's always RAW also.

All these recent Eagle pics were RAW.

For example, this shot was RAW. I needed the feather details and the ability to bring out the splash of color on the small bird. No way a JPG would capture this. And if it did, getting it out of the photo would have been a major bitch.

Hey, wait for me!!!

I always shoot in RAW.
Total random aside,I just deleted a very similar pic or a redwing blackbird except he was chasing a Red Tail Hawk. Ballsy little mofos.

[TripleBlack]

Originally Posted by carlton_fritz

I shoot in RAW and jpg. I use the lpg for a quick upload to the net. The RAW files are saved.

First... great that you keep the raws. They truly are digital negatives - JPGs aren't even close to that. I used to always shoot both - the JPGs are a great way to quickly review the files without loading raws into LR or something just to view them. Lately I've just been taking raws though.

The problem with uploading JPGs to the net without processing is Photobucket, Facebook, Instagram, etc. all use compression that mangles them pretty bad, especially if it's a camera with a high pixel count or a high contrast range. This is on top of the compression already done by your camera on the raw file. Results are a lot better if you compress the files before uploading with Lightroom, Photoshop, or any number of free utilities. There are guidelines for FB, Instagram, Flickr, etc. suggesting max file size and pixel dimensions. For years I used Gimp to resize photos before uploading to Photobucket, usually trying to keep the file size around 1mb. Now I just have a Lightroom preset that does that with a single click. It makes a big difference.

None of this matters if you just want to publish a casual snapshot, but if you want the shot you spent a lot of time and effort on to look its best, a few minutes processing it can make a lot of difference.

[TripleBlack]

Originally Posted by Thomas

But if I'm out actually taking pictures with a purpose in mind? Always RAW.

EXACTLY!

[carlton_fritz]

I saw an article showing how a bad photo (too dark for example) can be saved if you have the RAW file.

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Originally Posted by Fastguy

I just deleted a very similar pic or a redwing blackbird except he was chasing a Red Tail Hawk.

Oh I see. I kept my picture because I thought it was interesting but you figured the concept was dumb so you deleted yours.