Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: HOLY (Insert George Carlin word Here)
OpenSourcePhoto > YA wanna FIGHT! > RAW vs. JPEG
Eric Hegwer
So I've been a JPG shooter a loooong time - from my first 10D until now. I've got Terabytes of Jpegs. Stacks of DVDs, if you don't get the picture, I have a lot of JPG pics.

Last month 4 gig cards were on sale so I bought 10 - then I got a good deal on a Blu-Ray DVD burner, and then Aperture 2.0 came out.

It used to take FORever to do conversions (last time I tried). The buffers in my cameras couldn't keep up, it took a long time to open the files, and another time wasting step to do RAW conversions. And I was never happy with the conversion anyway.

But now EVERYTHING has changed.

Today there was a cosmic shift - I am now a RAW shooter.

The skin tones are sexy - The sharpness is amazing! Noise, what noise? JPG shooting taught me to nail the exposure, let me just say the files from my MID-DAY engagement shoot are incredible! This is from my trusty D200's. Sadly this couple didn't want to have their pics released to the public - but next weekend I've got a fantastic wedding. Who needs photoshop anymore? Wait and see... w00t.gif


K.C.
Thats good info to know Eric, thanks.
Matt Bowker
I'm still relatively new to all this, but I don't understand how anybody can shoot JPEG. I have zero problems with processing RAW, and I've learned to nail my exposures after a few shoots where I've had to pull images from the buttcrack of underexposure. I love the whole raw work flow, but if I had no other reason to shoot RAW, I would do it because I don't have time to fiddle with white balance while I'm shooting, and auto white balance sucks.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.