http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/RAW-file-format.htm
Chat Forum
[closed]
Photography - Shooting in RAW, talk to me....
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
Once you start making great photos out of technically fluffed shots - it gets boring quickly.
bear in mind no one but you will ever care about how a picture came about, they judge on what they see alone and 'technically fluffed' exists only in your head
... and for me the excitement lays in the subject and I couldn't give a stuff about what the camera is doing to capture it, in the same way as I never concern myself about what size iris my eyes select
Posted 2 years ago # -
I never concern myself about what size iris my eyes select
You would if it decided to close completely, or you wanted to experience that dilated effect rather than an exact replica of the scene in front of you.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Lightroom can as well.
What's Lightroom?
Sorry, I'm new to the software side of things!
Lightroom is another Adobe product, designed specifically for digital photos. It's a bit less of an editor than PS/Elements, and a bit more of a workflow & catalogue tool, but with some very useful & effective editing tools included. For 90% of my photo editing, Lightroom offers enough features.
Posted 2 years ago # -
You would if it decided to close completely
is that physically possible ? I would think it could only happen if I decided to look directly at the sun in which case I would want it to happen...
or you wanted to experience that dilated effect rather than an exact replica of the scene in front of you
I can see you really have fun times
Posted 2 years ago # -
You will be fine with a 400D using older versions of Elements and the raw converter
You can download newer versions of Adobe Camera RAW to work with older versions of photoshop, so no problems using a new camera with older photoshop.
Not exactly true i'm afraid, please see my previous reply
Posted 2 years ago # -
http://sebrogers.typepad.com/seb_rogers_blog/2007/02/shooting_raw_a_.html
seb is slightly misleading:
Another is that, armed with a raw file, the photographer can effectively make whatever white balance and exposure changes they like without affecting the quality of the outcome.
the raw file contains all the original colour data, and white balance is purely post processing, whether done in camera or subsequently
Posted 2 years ago # -
I've got a Canon 7D and shoot in raw for the majority of the shots.
As others have said its the ability to process where the advantage is.
I've switched to using Canon's own DPP software for the processing of the images. In my opinion its better than any of the other software avaliable Ie Photoshop in any of the editions.
If you've got a Canon give DPP a try, using RAW.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I've tried both jpeg & RAW.
I've set my camera to save jpeg & raw as well sometimes & spent ages looking for massive improvements in the raw image.I must be doing something wrong, because I can never tell the difference.
I will agree though that if I was shooting in potentially tricky situations, I would probably choose raw & jpeg just to give me the option of fiddling about with exposure a bit more later.
But for 90% of the time, I struggle to see that the benefits outweight the downsides for my photgraphy.I am concerned about the future-proof-ness of my raw files. Each camera needs it's own raw converter s/w, as I understand it.
In 20 yrs, what are the chances that Adobe will still be doing Photoshop with raw converter that will work with my D80? Will they support every camera that comes out for ever more? Genuinely, I don't know whether they will or not? Or whether I have missed something and this doesn't actually matter.Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
