RX10/100v1 .. worthwhile to shoot RAW?

Started Mar 11, 2014 | Discussions thread
Len_Gee Veteran Member • Posts: 9,686
Re: RX10/100v1 .. worthwhile to shoot RAW?

Ron AKA wrote:

Len_Gee wrote:

Ron AKA wrote:

cchen2 wrote:

thanks, I have PSE 10 and now Lightroom 5. Hopefully that will be enough. If true, that will give me most of what I'm using Raw for now.

PSE 10 will not open your RX10 RAW files, but with the most recent update (5.3?), your Lr 5 will. Once you convert to a JPEG or TIFF then you can export to PSE 10 for further pixel editing. But the Adobe Camera RAW part of PSE 10 is too old to open the RAW file directly.

Convert RX10 RAW files to Adobe DNG then import to PSE10 for further pixel editing? Save as TIFF or Jpeg When done. Is that a possible workflow with RX10 RAW?

Yes, it can be done and is a PITA to deal with the extra DNG files. And you do not get the benefits of using the newer 2012 Process in Adobe Camera RAW.

IMHO, RAW is a PITA if all you do is take snapshots and do nothing more than post to email, web, social media, print up to 11"x14", or do nothing with you pictures other than keep them in a virtual shoe box for your own viewing pleasure, or anal. Plus time in front of computer and uses more space on HDD.

If you are not going to post process then it makes no sense to take RAW. Put your effort into the JPEG in the camera. If you are going to post process then it makes not sense to work with a JPEG. Just depends what your objectives are.

Ron AKA. Yes, I agree with your comments 100%.

Disclaimer: I'm just a casual travel vacation and family snapper.  No training in "proper" post processing.  I hate spending time in front of a computer doing post processing, and potentially making the original image worst looking instead of making an improvement. ;).   Use iPhoto, and Photoshop Elements 12 for Mac for basic editing.

So, what I do is usually shoot RAW+Jpeg these days.   I like to hedge my bets. :).   High capacity memory cards are cheap, and large TB HDD's relatively inexpensive.

Now I convert and edit RAWs for anything that is "artistically worthy".   ;).   Use Jpeg for everything else.

I will admit, for a duffer like me, RAW has saved my bacon more than a few times ( once I forgot outdoors to change WB to Daylight, after shooting indoors under Tungsten).  Didn't chimp.  My bad.  From RAW, WB was easily corrected in post.

I have noticed though, a certain interpretation of final RAW conversion based on the particular third party RAW conversion software. Maybe more features? None could be more faithful than the conversion software supplied with the camera as the manufacturer intended?  I've always wondered about that.

And, the poster who claims to be a Pro.  Post a couple of "Pro" pics please.  Here, DPR Gallery, or your professional web site.   It would go along way towards your credibility.   And what you say.

RAW vs. Jpeg debate.   Especially for prosumer cameras like RX10/RX100.

This is an interesting thread I'll continue to follow.


 Len_Gee's gear list:Len_Gee's gear list
Sony RX100 Fujifilm X100T Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus PEN-F +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow