Does anyone want to give me a rundown on RAW?

[sobrien]

What are some of the benefits of shooting RAW, and how would you edit them any differently in photoshop?

[Cosmo]

You can retrieve detail from blown out highlights, and images are sharper. Thats about all I know.

[God damn it make up your mind]

When you edit JPEG photos, you lose a lot of data resulting in softer images.

With RAW, you don't lose that data resulting in sharper images. You also have a lot more control over how everything looks.

[Cosmo]

Can you edit RAW files in photoshop, cause I though you could, but I'm having problems loading them onto photoshop.

[sobrien]

Can you edit RAW files in photoshop, cause I though you could, but I'm having problems loading them onto photoshop.

I shot some RAW just now and can upload them onto CS3, what photoshop do you have?

[Cosmo]

7.0, I'll try again in a sec

[Cosmo]

Pentax offers me 2 raw formats, neither work with Photoshop 7. On Photoshop 7 accepts a raw file called [RAW], but the files off the pentax are called [DNG] and pentax's own raw file [PEF].

I get software that can view the raw files, but can't seem to edit them, only convert them to the other raw format and jpeg.....poop.

[bubbleboy]

Pentax offers me 2 raw formats, neither work with Photoshop 7. On Photoshop 7 accepts a raw file called [RAW], but the files off the pentax are called [DNG] and pentax's own raw file [PEF].

I get software that can view the raw files, but can't seem to edit them, only convert them to the other raw format and jpeg.....poop.

correct me if im wrong guys

but every camera company makes a different raw file, because it isnt universal, like a jpeg, apple is trying to make it universal, but whatever, no tthe point, you may need to save the file using whatever software came with your camera for that, because i remember when i went to that photog class at tcc, my teacher told me about how cs2 wouldnt read her nikon RAWs until she put it through Nikons software

dont know what the deal is, but thats all i can really say.

[SMR]

I use lightroom for it. I think you can download the lightroom 2 beta version for free. See if you can find that and try opening them with it.

And the ability to save highlights is one of the best things in the entire world

[God damn it make up your mind]

If/when i get a d200/300 i want to get capture NX2

[God damn it make up your mind]

Whats the diff between lightroom and cs3 and elements n' shit

[sobrien]

Whats the diff between lightroom and cs3 and elements n' shit

Light room is more for a big batch of photos, where you can edit exposure, sharpness, saturation, etc.

Photoshop CS3 is the top of the line photoshops, where the elements are watered down cheaper versions. Photoshops are more for single pictures and major editing jobs.

[SMR]

Yeah, lightroom is good for just super quick alterations in large amounts and gets everything done quickly. I think it's all I really need at my level right now though, it works wonderfully for what it is

[brenz-brenz]

When you edit JPEG photos, you lose a lot of data resulting in softer images.

With RAW, you don't lose that data resulting in sharper images. You also have a lot more control over how everything looks.

I don't think thats entirely accurate

[God damn it make up your mind]

I don't think thats entirely accurate


EXPLAIN.a

[Yuuki]

DNG is the universal .RAW format.

[notaskateaholic]

http://www.photoxels.com/tutorial_raw.html

[Yuuki]

Oh, and brenz, that is accurate.

RAW is an uncompressed image format, with no detail lost in the image capturing. When you take a JPEG, the image immediately compresses, despite what your user preferences are. So when you edit a raw, you are editing something that has lost no detail since the shutter being clicked until you edit the image, so there is a lot less quality lost. When you edit a jpeg, the sides and edges in the image become softer and less defined, ect, because it's already been compressed and can't take a huge amount of editing post exposure.

Basically, .RAW is ideal if you're shooting anything that you'll edit afterwards. JPEG is what you use when you're uploading straight to flickr/myspace/facebook/whatever, without any editing. you do this because JPEG uploads quickly, and still has suitable quality for a website like that.

[Cosmo]

How much quality loss is there when you convert raw to jpeg?, cause I can't seem to edit raw files, just convert them.

[Yuuki]

in the Canon raw conversion program, theres an editing system (similar to photoshop) which you can edit before you convert. iPhoto also enables you to edit in RAW before it auto converts.

i dunno about the nikon stuff though.

[ShredTheGnar]

Get Adobe Camera Raw plugin for Photoshop.

[Cosmo]

Get Adobe Camera Raw plugin for Photoshop.

I'm definately gonna get that.

[Dying_To_Live]

You can open and edit .NEF (nikon raw files) in Photoshop CS3

[goodmann]

Its not that images are sharper... Raw images contain more information in the shadow and highlight areas of an image allowing you to pull out more detail. The term "raw" is often called "lossless" where as JPEG is "lossy" which means you lose a lot of information in the conversion. Raw images are known to look more dull at first, but you really have a lot more control of the final outcome by using them... of course raw processors are sometimes expensive if you want to use good programs such as Adobe CS3 or Capture One.

[God damn it make up your mind]

Its not that images are sharper... Raw images contain more information in the shadow and highlight areas of an image allowing you to pull out more detail. The term "raw" is often called "lossless" where as JPEG is "lossy" which means you lose a lot of information in the conversion. Raw images are known to look more dull at first, but you really have a lot more control of the final outcome by using them... of course raw processors are sometimes expensive if you want to use good programs such as Adobe CS3 or Capture One.

making them sharper...

[bubbleboy]

making them sharper...
what are you fucking retarded?

more detail does not mean sharper

it obviously means the more crisp and detailed something is, the more blurry it gets.

jeeze