What format should i be taking pictures in?

K

kopite

Messages
182
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
Hey people,

I will be getting a sony a200 for christmas and I am reading up on stufff atm. i`ve read understanding exposure from cover to cover and thought it was an amazing read and cant wait to start taking pictures.

I`m wondering though what format I should be taking pictures in. From what I can gather the camera can take the pictures in Raw, jpg or both.

What are the benefits of each type?
Should i be shooting all in raw format or is it worth doing both or would I be better just doing jpg?

Thanks for any help
 
It depends in some way on what software you can use, what you want the photos for and many many other things.

For example before a Raw file can be "seen" it needs processed using something like the Raw convertor in Lightroom or Photoshop, (there are other though).

Raw is great for bringing out more detail in a shot, and if your thinking of shooting pro thats the one I would advise using (though I'm sure someone else would say jpg).

Jpg, This is great if you want to be able to show your shots immediately to others, but remember you can always create a jpg from a Raw but not the other way round.

So ask yourself, What do you want to shoot for? How much memory space have you got? and do you have the software etc for Raw.

Hope that helps a little.

I always shoot RAW, but in the end it comes down to choice :)

Enjoy your christmas prezzy.
 
jpg takes less space on the memory card and its instant, just copy the files off of the card and you're good to go.
raw files are much bigger (my 450D ones are circa 15Mb) this is because the data within the file is uncompressed. The main advantage with raw is that you have far more flexibility in photoshop etc to either add effect you want or to "save" an image that didn't quite match your expectations.

I began shooting in jpg until I was looking at what I'd taen and they didn't match up with stuff on the photo sites and on here, swtched to raw and now although my composition is still naff at least I get the saturation and colours that please my eye !
I dont really see the point in shotting both jpg and raw but ymmv.
 
Keltic Ice Man said:
It depends in some way on what software you can use, what you want the photos for and many many other things.

For example before a Raw file can be "seen" it needs processed using something like the Raw convertor in Lightroom or Photoshop, (there are other though).

Raw is great for bringing out more detail in a shot, and if your thinking of shooting pro thats the one I would advise using (though I'm sure someone else would say jpg).

Jpg, This is great if you want to be able to show your shots immediately to others, but remember you can always create a jpg from a Raw but not the other way round.

So ask yourself, What do you want to shoot for? How much memory space have you got? and do you have the software etc for Raw.

Hope that helps a little.

I always shoot RAW, but in the end it comes down to choice :)

Enjoy your christmas prezzy.
Click to expand...

:plusone: :agree:

I also only shoot Raw now
 
I have access to Photoshop so post processing in there is not a problem.

I also have 2 4gb cards for the camera so Space shouldnt be too much of an issue.

My previous camera was a Fujifilm point and click digital camera or the camera on my mobile so a lot of the stuff with the DSLR seems a bit daunting.

Is it possible to do a batch conversion to JPG from raw?

I want to create great pics and maybe add some funky effects via computer so It sounds like raw is the way to go.

thanks :D
 
I always shoot raw, the biggest plus in my mind is altering the white balance, something which is a lot more hassle with a jpg. There's also a bunch of other stuff you can tweek so by the time you hit 'open' it'll need a tiny bit of leveling and some curves.
 
One big advantage, the way I see it, of using RAW is that you don't run the risk of saving over your original file. With enough discipline, it wouldn't be a problem with jpeg, but I'm not that disciplined.
 
I always shoot both Raw and best JPG, I use the JPGs if I want to use an image quickly for the net or if I haven't got the time to do any processing, but if I want to do some tweaking of the shot, HDR or change the exposure then I can use the RAW files.

I use the JPGs much like a print from a 1 hour lab, but the RAW files are like the negatives I would have printed myself. I also use the JPGs to reference the RAW files.

Why do I do this, because I can, and I have plenty of memory cards available.

If you have the capacity, aside from a small loss of speed when the camera is processing the files (not a problem with my genres of photography) then I can't see any reason why not have both.
 
Jpeg all the way. Tried RAW, didn't float my boat, got the results I wanted from jpegs, even after post-production.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top