Raw and jpeg

E

Emma-1989

Messages
12
Name
Emma Burns
Edit My Images
Yes
what's the difference between raw and jpeg? When shooting in raw my images wont load onto my laptop but when i shoot in fine (jpeg) they upload.. I'm new to photography as you can probably tell :) Please help x
 
RAW and JPEG are two different file formats for the photograph your camera captures.

Basically, RAW captures far more data than JPEG and specific software is needed to edit RAW.

Do you have a Windows or a Mac laptop?
 
RAW files are not image files. They cannot be seen; they don't make sense in a "visual" format. They are the "raw" data captured by your sensor. In order to be viewable, they must be processed into an image file (like JPG). When you look at a RAW file on the back of your camera you are looking at a JPG, albeit a JPG "preview", this is what your RAW file would look like should you convert it there and then using your camera's default conversion parameters.
You can upload to a RAW editor (like Lightroom, for example) and that will, again, show you a JPG preview but the huge amounts of "extra" data will still be there, lingering around in the digital ether, this means you have far more latitude for converting the image into a visible format that YOU are happy with (not one that your camera's designers think is a good one-size-fits-all conversion). Once you convert to JPG you throw out all the extra data, giving you a much smaller file, before you convert you can use that data to, for example, rescue apparently blown highlights and things like that.
RAW does NOT give you better images. It simply gives you more latitude for getting the best from your images.

Think of a RAW file sort of like undeveloped film, straight from the back of an old camera. You can't see the image on it, but it has lots of potential for being processed in different ways to give you lots of different "interpretations" of your image. The obvious benefit over this old system is that you can mess around with RAW files as much as you want; once you start to process film it's irreversible.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
I have a windows 7 i think x
RedRobin said:
RAW and JPEG are two different file formats for the photograph your camera captures.

Basically, RAW captures far more data than JPEG and specific software is needed to edit RAW.

Do you have a Windows or a Mac laptop?
Click to expand...
 
thank you for your help. So should i shoot in jpeg? I'm just starting newborn and childrens photography x
 
Emma-1989 said:
thank you for your help. So should i shoot in jpeg? I'm just starting newborn and childrens photography x
Click to expand...
Shoot how you want. If you're comfortable with taking the processing into your own hands, RAW gives you more flexibility.
 
Emma-1989 said:
thank you for your help. So should i shoot in jpeg? I'm just starting newborn and childrens photography x
Click to expand...

It isn't unusual for people just starting outing photography to begin by shooting JPEG and then move to shooting RAW. When I bought my first DSLR I was shooting JPEG at first so I could grasp the basics of the camera with as few other things to worry about as possible, then after about 6 months when I was comfortable with those basics I switched to RAW and dived into the world of extra processing that requires. That could be one way to approach it. :)
 
Most cameras will shoot Jpeg and raw at the same time.
This is ideal for beginners as they can just use the Jpegs and hold the raw's in reserve.
At some time in the future you will be very unhappy with some of the the Jpegs. You will then be able to go back to the raws with new understanding and process them to give the result you want.

You could move them to another spare hard disk if you are worried about the space involved.

At the moment you do not have the knowledge to make an informed choice, nor the necessary skill to get the best out of a raw. So shoot fine Jpeg +raw
 
Last edited:
So should i shoot in jpeg? I'm just starting newborn and childrens photography

As a business do you mean or just for fun with your own kids/friends' kids?

In my wee studio (some 8+ years ago) I shot kids in jpeg only. Ok so it was with powerful studio lights at highish f-numbers, big softboxes and WB sorted and i rarely sold anything bigger than A3 that wasn't a canvas - so it was ok then

Generally, I'd shoot raw

If you're wanting to do this as a business though, you really ought to know all this BEFORE launching into it :)

Dave
 
PMN said:
Could've fooled me.
Click to expand...
Obviously. But look, somebody who is new to photography is, by definition, lacking in knowledge, skills, and experience. That's not to say they won't develop those attributes quickly, but a smart person always recognises where their knowledge, skills, and experience are lacking and works around that. In this case, the best approach is to shoot RAW and JPEG. Just saying "shout RAW because it's better'" isn't helpful at all.
 
StewartR said:
Just saying "shout RAW because it's better'" isn't helpful at all.
Click to expand...

Where did I suggest people do that? I'm more than aware of how utterly useless that is. Explain the differences between RAW and JPEG and explain the benefits of each, but there's no reason to sit there and basically say 'you know nothing'. She's here asking for advice, not to be spoken down to.
 
Last edited:
PMN said:
Could've fooled me.
Click to expand...
He's being honest, you need technical expertise and understanding to be able to get the best from a raw file, which will come in time.
 
odd jim said:
He's being honest, you need technical expertise and understanding to be able to get the best from a raw file, which will come in time.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. I'm talking about how he's saying it rather than what he's actually saying. Imagine running a photography course and opening up to new people by saying 'you know nothing'. They know they know nothing (or relatively little) that's why they're there. They don't need to be told that.
 
No one is talking down to any one.
This is an often asked question and the answers tend to be read by people with the same problems. The answer will apply to them all.

In this case she stated her level, and the fact she needed to ask the question established it as fact.
I gave her the best possible compromise that catered for her present level of experience and the fact that she would likely quickly reach the point when raw files would be advantageous.
With child photographs you can not go back later and re shoot, as they grow up so rapidly. Taking Raw + jpeg at least gives you the option of going back and improving your results when you gain more skills.

I could have said you need to learn photoshop or the like, but this could be a path she chooses for herself as she gains experience.
It is all a question of getting from where you are, to where you want to be in a logical and constructive way.
 
i wish i hadn't of asked. Yes I'm new to photography and don't know a lot and that's why I'm here to ask questions.. Not to be patronised and spoken to like a complete idiot. Thanks for knocking my confidence!
 
RAW+JPEG would be a good place to start.

If you shoot JPEG only, the image is processed and compressed in-camera, so some of the original information is lost. If you nailed the exposure, then the resulting JPEG will most likely be fine. If on the other hand you got the exposure or White Balance wrong, then you can recover a lot more from the RAW file in post. So if you're going to have paying clients, the RAW insurance might be useful. With more experience and knowledge, you'll understand how to get even more out of RAW files and may well then choose to shoot RAW only.

I nearly always shoot JPEG only, but not if I'm shooting for someone else or of a subject that's a one-off. Then I shoot JPEG+RAW.
 
Emma-1989 said:
i wish i hadn't of asked. Yes I'm new to photography and don't know a lot and that's why I'm here to ask questions.. Not to be patronised and spoken to like a complete idiot. Thanks for knocking my confidence!
Click to expand...

Emma don't take any notice of the knockers you'll always get them on any forum but luckily most people on here are not like that.

As to RAW or JPEG to be honest it doesn't really matter no matter what the proponents of RAW will say - you can do a lot more when editing JPEGs than most people realise.

Just shoot what you are happiest with then when and if the time comes when you want to move on to RAW you will be much better equipped to do so.

And if you want you can also post some of your pics on here, or, if you use Flickr, past a link to your Flickr so we can view them on there.

BTW if you look at my pics on Flickr most of them for the last three year or so were taken on JPEG and edited afterwards.
.
 
Last edited:
I don't think anyone has actually 'knocked' her have they?

Personally I think it's all been good, decent advice. One person misinterpreted a post but no ones criticised or insulted the OP.
 
Last edited:
Emma-1989 said:
i wish i hadn't of asked. Yes I'm new to photography and don't know a lot and that's why I'm here to ask questions.. Not to be patronised and spoken to like a complete idiot. Thanks for knocking my confidence!
Click to expand...
Emma, have you read through all the useful posts?

There's some good advice there and people have taken time in some of their replies.

To say you wish you hadn't asked comes across as a little ungrateful if you don't mind me saying.
 
Errmm who are you?! Yes i have read through the posts and I'm grateful for the replies minus one. Not that i should have to explain myself to you.
 
There you go again...
 
Emma many people here do tend to spout off on their own agendas, not to mention that they pick arguments amongst themselves. Develop a thick skin and keep at it. Did you read pookeyhead's treatise that he linked to? The answer's to shoot in RAW. Maybe your camera came with software on disc that can open the RAW files? There'll be a workaround somehow - it might get technical but it needn't cost thousands and could be quite cheap.

Your into quite a demanding field that involves people-management, lighting assessment and camera settings then image processing.
 
I think someone needs to be a little less defensive and confrontational, especially if she wants advice from other members :/
 
I was talking to Emma, who made a rational enquiry, Jim, and not you.
 
It is!
 
I'm sure there's a comedy sketch here where a misunderstanding of a simple question's reply leads to WWIII :D

Emma - jpeg fine is called that as most of the time it is simply that... fine - so use it :)

Dave

PS - that's a joke btw, its not really called 'fine' for that reason, but is nicely sums up its use for many and certainly to a newbie it is fine to use it too :)
 
Emma, welcome to the forum and to photography. As you can see, it's an interesting place.

I shot in JPG only when I first started. Eventually I started shooting in RAW+jpg, and then I found myself discarding the jpgs so just switched to RAW.

Getting a RAW to look as good as (and better) a jpg requires some software and a little knowledge of how to use that software. It's not overly complicated and there is lots of information available on YouTube for how to do it.

My suggestion to people new to photography is to start in jpg, learn about their camera and about photography, and then think about a switch to RAW if they want. Plenty of excellent photographs were taken in jpg.

Good luck, I hope this isn't your last question.
 
If you're working on site where the punters view the images (show jumping) and are printed to 10x8 you have no time for PP, so jpeg is a god send in some situations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top