RAW/JPG Article

Started Nov 8, 2012 | Discussions thread
gil
gil
Forum ProPosts: 16,523
Like?
Re: RAW isn't just for exposure
In reply to tko, Nov 10, 2012

tko wrote:

How do you get the noise reduction right? White balance? Contrast? Sharpness? Do you ever need fill or highlight recovery for high contrast scenes?

<gil> Fair questions and here are some amateurish input from me. You must know the answer to that if you believe yourself as a photographer :-). With years of amateur practice, studying the subject, locations' light/angles, experimentation, analyzing results, etc.; one can now set in the camera baseline settings that you have mentioned. In my case, I still do a bit of PP even when shooting JPG but my baselines are good start that I don't need to recover or improve much and of course only to my liking and preference. I am a simple and basic amateur using manual settings 90% of the time. I mostly vary only three variables - ISO, aperture and shutter speed (WB is basic manual - sunny for sunny condition, cloudy for cloudy, shade under shade, flash for flash). Control of light is mostly done with shutter adjustment once I set the baselines.

RAW isn't just for exposure. And for difficult scenes, getting the exposure right can take longer than shooting and processing RAW.

<gil> I have no problem with that but yes, tough conditions requires lots of fun  experimentation and setup but I don't mind because it gives me a lot of time to analyze in the field what works ok and what does not work ok. I would rather have fun outside than inside :-D. After some 8 years of doing those fun stuff on the subjects I do, I mostly have a good feel on what usable settings I could use. Yes, I tinkered a bit with RAW long time ago and it just didn't suit my style as I want to do all those pull/push/recovery/etc. while in the field. I do photography for fun and nothing else.

It kind of kills me when people suggest the are so good they get exposure, WB, contrast, and sharpness right on every photo, but have no interest in using RAW.

Why it bothers you when some says they get good enough stuff when not using RAW? Your standard may not be the same as others. I may have a lower image standard than yours and thus a lower satisfaction level. What I am saying was that I am satisfied and happy that I could get the results I want by trying to improve my exposure as best as I can from JPG that maybe I need only a bit PP and not the whole capability from RAW. I might not be able to pull out some critical details and highlight but if I am satisfied with my image and composition overall, that is all that matters. If maybe you have seen some of my non-PP JPG shots, you might say those are just snaps and amateurish but to me, those are good enough.

gil wrote:

have any problem with others finding satisfaction with RAW :-D. De gustibus non est disputandum - of likes and dislikes, there should be no disputing - live and let live.

cheers,

gil

-- hide signature --

Cheers, gil - San Jose, CA Cheap Lens, JPG and 100% Handholding Provocateur Like happiness, photography is often better created than pursued.

-- hide signature --

Cheers, gil - San Jose, CA Cheap Lens, JPG and 100% Handholding Provocateur Like happiness, photography is often better created than pursued.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow