Before posting more content, I would suggest you gain a better understanding of the subject you'd like to discuss. Perhaps a script would also be of benefit to you.
@mrmeadowsiscool i stated that you can do it in many programs. Mine was photoshop, but you are altering the RAW data. In no way did i use photoshop itself to touch the items up..
Can do the same thing in Jpeg with photoshop and white balance can be changed with colour correction. Photoshop will not open Neff files from Nikon anyway and by comparison we have not found that much of a difference.
how are we supposed to concentrate on what you're saying when you have a song embedded into the video, this would normally be one of those "instant mute" youtube videos because of the music..........
@Pixelmotivator You can only edit some parts of the pictures in Jpeg. You wont have all the options for the white balance and there are some other setting you wont have ether... In order for RAW to give you a 100% you need to take the pic in RAW format on the camera.
ur words and the words in the songs are not good to put together. If u put music in a video choose something only instrumental in it so it is actual background sound not competing with u talking
@musicboy123456 its a CPU, Internet, Memory and Temp gauge that monitors my computer. In summer it gets very warm in my room so i was using it to keep an eye on it
@musicboy123456 its showing us his heart rate...beep.beep,beep,beeppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp...dam this video just died
I'm sorry, but you didn't really show any true difference between Raw and JPEG. Even JPEG can be edited to look like that RAW file you just imported.
You didn't show any dynamic range improvements. The main difference between the two formats is that RAW contains all the colour information of individual pixels as it was taken in the camera, while JPEG is more of a photocopy of that. You can rescue details from blown out highlights in RAW, while it's impossible on JPEG after a certain point.
@milkkcratee no worries. Pentax to me is a great entry level. Not too expensive yet good quality. I wouldn't, however, buy a high end pentax. Nothing against it, but i'd rather a Nikon
I like this. I think thats why I wanted to get into photography in the first place to create something...more ya know?. I like the fact that you can take a photo and make it into your own little project.
If you know how to make a photo ,you dont need RAW,Almost every pro use only JPEG.Taking a photo from a cola can on the right way prevents you too need RAW editing.
@photography1990 I kind of agree with atramos3 to be honest. Your comparisons aren't fair - A RAW file needs to be processed and converted to a JPEG until you can really compare them. For a beginner, all they need to know is that a JPEG is a RAW file that was processed in-camera before being converted to a JPEG, whereas a RAW file is exactly that - you make the tweaks yourself, rather than using your in-camera "presets". The problem with a JPEG is that you loose the original RAW data.
@KalusConK I am very open to feedback. Just look at my responses and you will see that. I am not making another video anytime soon, nor have I, so the feedback will be taken on board but not used
People need to stop thinking of RAW files as images. They are files you make images from (such as jpegs). Of course it's going to look better if you retouch one and not the other but you could have retouched the jpeg in Photoshop and left the RAW on default settings. A better example of why to shoot RAW would be to shoot with the camera settings wrong (like a really off white balance) and then try to correct both files in post.
you can adjust the sharpness etc also in jpg i agree raw is betetr but you have only used a standard jpeg image that wasnt retouched whereas the raw was DOH
Been a pro photographer, there isnt a hell of a difference betwen raw and jpeg
What's the deal with this raw vs. jpeg? I shoot jpeg when i'm on holiday, that way it's convenient to email pictures, and raw if i am going to REALLY tweak the images later on, since it gives me full control in editing programs.. if in doubt, shoot both raw and jpeg.. you'll have the best of both worlds : ) (but be sure you have a lot of memory capacity, obviously...) i think the format you shoot in depends on the scenario you're in...
i shot raw and jpeg tweaked both images the same way and my jpeg picture looked complete garbage compare to my raw pic. please dont say u can tweak jpeg the same way cus u cant. i mean u caa tweak some stuff but nowhere near as what u can do with raw file.
@goga56 i only meant that you can tweak it with photoshop programs, such as NIK software. Google it. By this video, you can see my stance on the different formats ;)
@OneGoodCompany Im not forcing anyone to do anything mate. Im purely pointing out some facts about the differences between Raw and JPEG. For the amateur photographer who has the capabilities to shoot raw and the small editing ability it requires, i believe its a better choice to shoot RAW. If you do not agree with this thats fine. I am not stating anything to do with composition purely just a quick shoot. Composition and other elements would require a very long video explaining it all. Thanks
@OneGoodCompany but that's exactly the point: when you shoot raw you don't need to care about your whitebalance and even when you over or underexpose it a bit it's not a big issue to bring a raw file back. that means that you can put more focus and more effort on your composition. and if you want to print your image in a huge format the 10mp rawfile really looks better than the jpeg. if you for example make a 40x60 print there is a chance that you see some jpeg artifacts due to the compression.
@OneGoodCompany Are you kidding me? Raw is far superior to JPEG. It is a lossless file format that keeps all the raw data you get from your digital capture. Whereas JPEG is a lossy file that compresses the file and discard what it thinks is "unnecessary" data - then compresses again every time you adjust it and save it. RAW gives you the most capabilities in post production. The larger the file, the more information. RAW is way larger. Ask any professional photographer. RAW keeps all info
@clownscared001 Good points, i know most professionals shoot raw, but i wouldn't say it's "superior" to jpeg, it's just depends on what you're shooting. I mean... I personally wouldn't want to go to a family reunion and take 500 raw photos of my family with uncle bob drunk in the background.. raw is best when you need COMPLETE control over your image but i'm just rambling now..
@repeatdreaming There's always batch editing though. Edit one image from one condition and in most cases you can apply all the changes to all the photos and make them look very alike.
I shoot film... Only because I don't have the immediate money to get a DSLR. When I get a DSLR, I will shoot RAW! RAW is like your film negative, you can do anything you want with it! You can fix or tweak your negatives in the dark room!
@CricketboyStudios Exactly. Very good way of explaining it. Its like playing with the negative, because (i believe) its the digital version of the Film Negative - anything can be done. My dad was a photographer, and he used film all the time, and showed me how to manipulate the negatives and even add things into the negatives to create edits. Like a fake UFO image. Its easily done, just like RAW :) thanks for your comment!
The RAW image looks better in the end because you tweaked it...
You can tweak the JPEG image too!!! This is what baffles me.. why is everyone in this argument acting like JPEGs cannot be touched later??? Like that is my end result, and there's nothing I can do to a JPEG picture...
@fiveonefiveoh Yes your right you could edit jpeg too, but raw is more easier cuz it give you everything you need. Its really not big of a deal, I get your point. Why are everyone acting like professionals that raw is better than jpeg. Its not raw or jpeg its what you shoot and how you tweak it.
@fiveonefiveoh JPEG's can be tweaked at the end, but RAW images can be made into absolutely anything. RAW has more options, JPEG is almost set in stone. My theory? You can't polish a turd without getting your hands dirty ;) Make it easy on yourself, shoot RAW if your going to edit
Thank you very much for your info. I have a 16gb card, so I guess I just gotta go out there and experiment with RAW and Jpeg - identical pictures and see what results I get. Thanks again.
I see what you mean, but weighing up the pro's and con's of faffing about with Raw files (like losing half the space on your mem card or only being able to open my raw files with the program that came with the camera - Sony, and to be honest, I can do more in CS4 with a jpeg than I can with a Raw file in that program ) I find myself thinking I'd rather work in Jpegs. I don't want to sound negative and I'd like to work in Raw, but looking at the results of both formats, Raw doesn't seem worth it
@22raffles No i understand :) When im just shooting normal images i shoot JPEG. But, for example, recently i have been doing long exposure waterfall shots at night. For this, i use my 16gb card and i use the RAW output method. I currently have almost 350 images on the card and no problem at all. It all depends on the size memory card you have, i have a 32gb card for when im going out and need to take alot of raw images. THe negatives are that you take up more space on your computer & memory card
Yup, I open my Jpeg pics in the program you are using in this video, do exactly the same editing you have done and then at the bottom right I get the option to open or cancel image. Open image throws my now modified Jpeg into CS4, where I can carry on changing it if I wish or just save it. I'm confused because everywhere I look on Ytube people make it sound like you have to and can only change all these things in RAW format, but I am doing it in Jpeg and getting the same results!? ta 4 help btw
yeah once its edited, you can save it as the photoshop which will keep it with the edits as layers, if you SAVE AS then you will keep the raw image as the source and you will have a secondary (ie the jpeg) but as soon as its jpeg you cant go back. i take them in raw then save a copy as jpeg, so i can go back and edit them again later if needed. Once the raw is edited, you will have the edits still so its better than a base jpeg if you get what i mean :) no worries :)
OMG... I have never been SO confused! Where to start? When I open a jpeg pic on my pc, it opens first in camera raw - yes, Camera Raw... I can then change all the settings like you have in this vid, and then click open and it opens in CS4 where I can save it or continue to adjust it some more. However I can't open a raw file in camera raw...what's that all about?
@22raffles so you make the changes then open it into photoshop? Then save it as a new image as either photoshop format or JPEG for uploading to the net :)
@setosail Not sure what Piknick is sorry, i only really use photoshop. In photoshop it opens a menu that you do not see unless you open a RAW image. The only way to tell for you is to try it :)
@rickalex21 well if your uploading to the internet you have most likely modified them already, so converting to JPEG is fine. If you save it as a large image and dont compress you will loose no image quality, its if you take the image as a JPEG you cannot modify it like you can with a RAW image.
@papirus1995 No it is not. Each vendor has it's own format, even between models. RAW is a joke. The effect in this video is more own to a badly setup colour management config, then the "power" of working with RAW.
If you really really need RAW, you probably need more experience with your camera and lenses. If you really really need more dynamic range, you need HDR processing, not the bag of hot air that is 12/14 bit RAW.
@retepvosnul I wouldn't go as far as saying RAW is a joke, nor someone who uses RAW images needs more experience with their camera. If you are shooting in an 'unstable' weather or doing a once off job such as a wedding then i believe you should use RAW because it gives you the safety of being able to edit the images if there is one little imperfection. Better to be safe then sorry, and if you miss that 'million dollar shot' because a program wont bring out that over-processed jpeg its your loss.
@photography1990 And if you had that Zeiss lens instead of the Tokina one, you'd also could make that argument. Same goes for camera bodies, filters, flashes, and even inches lacking in legheight. So people without a 1D and Zeiss distagon collection are losing out.. Tosh, I say.
More world press photo's where shot using the good old "sunny 16" rule of thumb then using the best of the best practices in photography.
It is the same non-sense as hardcore audiophiles profess. Trivialities.
owl city and a pentax...
johnnyisahermit 4 days ago
@johnnyisahermit johnny and a hermit...
photography1990 3 days ago
Before posting more content, I would suggest you gain a better understanding of the subject you'd like to discuss. Perhaps a script would also be of benefit to you.
setherial666 4 days ago
Technically you have touched it in photoshop.
mrmeadowsiscool 5 days ago
@mrmeadowsiscool i stated that you can do it in many programs. Mine was photoshop, but you are altering the RAW data. In no way did i use photoshop itself to touch the items up..
photography1990 4 days ago
@photography1990 Im saying you DID use photoshop.. It is photoshop's Camera RAW correct? it's still part of photoshop.
mrmeadowsiscool 4 days ago
Very helpful video, thanks for posting it.
Lonearcher707 5 days ago
Can do the same thing in Jpeg with photoshop and white balance can be changed with colour correction. Photoshop will not open Neff files from Nikon anyway and by comparison we have not found that much of a difference.
CarlyWaarly 1 week ago
dirty, recording with full of music.... can't here voice.
mohanhks 1 week ago
Thats what ive actually listened! I try to make my self believe that planet earth turns slooooowly! lool
kolastick 1 week ago
It might have been a nice tutorial but trying to listen to you through music was too annoying.
Waremonger 2 weeks ago
Thanks,
I totally agree with the comments on THE MUSIC!
middlegrayatmac 2 weeks ago
This is not Jpeg vs Raw the description should say why I shoot raw
jjdbest7 4 weeks ago
how are we supposed to concentrate on what you're saying when you have a song embedded into the video, this would normally be one of those "instant mute" youtube videos because of the music..........
jeffm4688 1 month ago
except the music... everything else is nice...=D
dragonology294 1 month ago
If you have Photoshop you can open a Jpeg image as a RAW file & edit them in just the same way.
Pixelmotivator 1 month ago
@Pixelmotivator b/w images too?
b1tTutorials 1 month ago
@Pixelmotivator You can only edit some parts of the pictures in Jpeg. You wont have all the options for the white balance and there are some other setting you wont have ether... In order for RAW to give you a 100% you need to take the pic in RAW format on the camera.
chris072580 1 month ago
ur words and the words in the songs are not good to put together. If u put music in a video choose something only instrumental in it so it is actual background sound not competing with u talking
skybitscom 1 month ago
terrible video, pls dont post any more videos and dont crowd youtube
fateless78 1 month ago
@fateless78 your stupidity is outstanding. Thank you for your comment + view. Come back again
photography1990 1 month ago 12
Clarity is NOT a substatute for focus...Focus is the basis for ANY photo. NOt focused well...no good!
hyperfocus2011 1 month ago
Why have music during speaking? Why has that become such a big thing on youtube? GEEEZ!
MindBeyondAverage 1 month ago
Probably could have done without the gay music that's too loud, very distracting when trying to listen to what you're saying
Briandilori 1 month ago
where is JPEG ?
arbanaskocudo 2 months ago
yoooooooooorn
valkanadimova 2 months ago
what is that in the left corner of your screen ?
musicboy123456 2 months ago 2
@musicboy123456 its a CPU, Internet, Memory and Temp gauge that monitors my computer. In summer it gets very warm in my room so i was using it to keep an eye on it
photography1990 2 months ago 3
@photography1990 do u have a link for it ?
musicboy123456 1 month ago
@musicboy123456 no mate i don't sorry
photography1990 1 month ago
@musicboy123456 its showing us his heart rate...beep.beep,beep,beeppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp...dam this video just died
brickbandits09 1 month ago
I'm sorry, but you didn't really show any true difference between Raw and JPEG. Even JPEG can be edited to look like that RAW file you just imported.
You didn't show any dynamic range improvements. The main difference between the two formats is that RAW contains all the colour information of individual pixels as it was taken in the camera, while JPEG is more of a photocopy of that. You can rescue details from blown out highlights in RAW, while it's impossible on JPEG after a certain point.
AephursLocket 2 months ago 5
Sorry but the music is too distracting.
neatpleats11 2 months ago
first impression, a 2008 graffiti cbr, this guy got taste.
helladatguy 2 months ago
Sweet man, thanks for your help, what are your opinions on the Pentax? Thanks!
milkkcratee 2 months ago
@milkkcratee no worries. Pentax to me is a great entry level. Not too expensive yet good quality. I wouldn't, however, buy a high end pentax. Nothing against it, but i'd rather a Nikon
photography1990 2 months ago 3
what is the name of this program please ?
shity8 3 months ago
@shity8 to edit programs? Photoshop
photography1990 2 months ago
I like this. I think thats why I wanted to get into photography in the first place to create something...more ya know?. I like the fact that you can take a photo and make it into your own little project.
heavenwithin81 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Do you even know what RAW is?
BokorugroRR 3 months ago
If you know how to make a photo ,you dont need RAW,Almost every pro use only JPEG.Taking a photo from a cola can on the right way prevents you too need RAW editing.
helthuismartin 3 months ago
sound quality is quite low... volume settings could be higher
eireannsg 3 months ago
RAW!
KELLZ720 4 months ago
I can't watch the rest of this... I'm a relative beginner and I see too much wrong and misleading info in the first 2 minutes already
atramos3 4 months ago 7
@atramos3 when you make your own video please send me a link and i'll be more than happy to watch your views on the matter.
photography1990 4 months ago
@photography1990 I kind of agree with atramos3 to be honest. Your comparisons aren't fair - A RAW file needs to be processed and converted to a JPEG until you can really compare them. For a beginner, all they need to know is that a JPEG is a RAW file that was processed in-camera before being converted to a JPEG, whereas a RAW file is exactly that - you make the tweaks yourself, rather than using your in-camera "presets". The problem with a JPEG is that you loose the original RAW data.
mattandhisnikon 4 months ago
@photography1990 you should be more open to feedback, if you want to keep improving. The music is louder than your voice, it's hard to understand.
KalusConK 3 months ago
@KalusConK I am very open to feedback. Just look at my responses and you will see that. I am not making another video anytime soon, nor have I, so the feedback will be taken on board but not used
photography1990 3 months ago
the music makes me not even want to watch this
venustuesday 4 months ago 35
@venustuesday Thanks for watching it anyway tho, every view counts
photography1990 4 months ago
People need to stop thinking of RAW files as images. They are files you make images from (such as jpegs). Of course it's going to look better if you retouch one and not the other but you could have retouched the jpeg in Photoshop and left the RAW on default settings. A better example of why to shoot RAW would be to shoot with the camera settings wrong (like a really off white balance) and then try to correct both files in post.
jamiewindsor 5 months ago
Good video, but the music is far too much in your face though.
FirebrandNIRE 6 months ago
Like the video BUT PLEASE next time background music so DISTRACTING! i had hard time concentrating and catching on to everything.
maymaiv1 7 months ago 24
@maymaiv1 yeah looking back now i see what you mean. I didn't think anyone would view this, i did it for a project. Thanks mate
photography1990 4 months ago
@maymaiv1: It's incredibly annoying to have music when there's speak as well.
Cougar12dk 2 months ago
you don't need to shoot in raw to edit as if you have, you can just edit in Adobe Lightroom for a normal JPEG and it works just as well. =D
2lolol3 7 months ago
you can adjust the sharpness etc also in jpg i agree raw is betetr but you have only used a standard jpeg image that wasnt retouched whereas the raw was DOH
Been a pro photographer, there isnt a hell of a difference betwen raw and jpeg
shanetralee 8 months ago
You can do this with jpeg you know...for years now..
Tripod? Wtf
steveonlyintheweek 8 months ago
@steveonlyintheweek You can't control exposure. Any changes are overlayed, like filters in photoshop when adjusting JPEGS.
zurijohn 8 months ago
i can change my jpegs without photoshop
amirborhani 10 months ago
What's the deal with this raw vs. jpeg? I shoot jpeg when i'm on holiday, that way it's convenient to email pictures, and raw if i am going to REALLY tweak the images later on, since it gives me full control in editing programs.. if in doubt, shoot both raw and jpeg.. you'll have the best of both worlds : ) (but be sure you have a lot of memory capacity, obviously...) i think the format you shoot in depends on the scenario you're in...
repeatdreaming 10 months ago
Use Adobe Lightroom :)
pintoantoe 10 months ago
i shot raw and jpeg tweaked both images the same way and my jpeg picture looked complete garbage compare to my raw pic. please dont say u can tweak jpeg the same way cus u cant. i mean u caa tweak some stuff but nowhere near as what u can do with raw file.
goga56 1 year ago 4
@goga56 i only meant that you can tweak it with photoshop programs, such as NIK software. Google it. By this video, you can see my stance on the different formats ;)
photography1990 1 year ago
Comment removed
OneGoodCompany 1 year ago
@OneGoodCompany Im not forcing anyone to do anything mate. Im purely pointing out some facts about the differences between Raw and JPEG. For the amateur photographer who has the capabilities to shoot raw and the small editing ability it requires, i believe its a better choice to shoot RAW. If you do not agree with this thats fine. I am not stating anything to do with composition purely just a quick shoot. Composition and other elements would require a very long video explaining it all. Thanks
photography1990 1 year ago
@OneGoodCompany but that's exactly the point: when you shoot raw you don't need to care about your whitebalance and even when you over or underexpose it a bit it's not a big issue to bring a raw file back. that means that you can put more focus and more effort on your composition. and if you want to print your image in a huge format the 10mp rawfile really looks better than the jpeg. if you for example make a 40x60 print there is a chance that you see some jpeg artifacts due to the compression.
idrive12 11 months ago
@OneGoodCompany Are you kidding me? Raw is far superior to JPEG. It is a lossless file format that keeps all the raw data you get from your digital capture. Whereas JPEG is a lossy file that compresses the file and discard what it thinks is "unnecessary" data - then compresses again every time you adjust it and save it. RAW gives you the most capabilities in post production. The larger the file, the more information. RAW is way larger. Ask any professional photographer. RAW keeps all info
clownscared001 10 months ago
@clownscared001 Good points, i know most professionals shoot raw, but i wouldn't say it's "superior" to jpeg, it's just depends on what you're shooting. I mean... I personally wouldn't want to go to a family reunion and take 500 raw photos of my family with uncle bob drunk in the background.. raw is best when you need COMPLETE control over your image but i'm just rambling now..
repeatdreaming 10 months ago
@repeatdreaming There's always batch editing though. Edit one image from one condition and in most cases you can apply all the changes to all the photos and make them look very alike.
LeagueCommentary 10 months ago
I shoot film... Only because I don't have the immediate money to get a DSLR. When I get a DSLR, I will shoot RAW! RAW is like your film negative, you can do anything you want with it! You can fix or tweak your negatives in the dark room!
CricketboyStudios 1 year ago 3
@CricketboyStudios Exactly. Very good way of explaining it. Its like playing with the negative, because (i believe) its the digital version of the Film Negative - anything can be done. My dad was a photographer, and he used film all the time, and showed me how to manipulate the negatives and even add things into the negatives to create edits. Like a fake UFO image. Its easily done, just like RAW :) thanks for your comment!
photography1990 1 year ago 4
Thank you for a very informative video!
TofuProductionCinema 1 year ago
@TofuProductionCinema Thanks Mate :)
photography1990 1 year ago
The RAW image looks better in the end because you tweaked it...
You can tweak the JPEG image too!!! This is what baffles me.. why is everyone in this argument acting like JPEGs cannot be touched later??? Like that is my end result, and there's nothing I can do to a JPEG picture...
fiveonefiveoh 1 year ago
@fiveonefiveoh Yes your right you could edit jpeg too, but raw is more easier cuz it give you everything you need. Its really not big of a deal, I get your point. Why are everyone acting like professionals that raw is better than jpeg. Its not raw or jpeg its what you shoot and how you tweak it.
Lalune350z 1 year ago
@fiveonefiveoh JPEG's can be tweaked at the end, but RAW images can be made into absolutely anything. RAW has more options, JPEG is almost set in stone. My theory? You can't polish a turd without getting your hands dirty ;) Make it easy on yourself, shoot RAW if your going to edit
photography1990 1 year ago
Comment removed
DinosaursOnceRuled 1 year ago
@DinosaursOnceRuled Im sorry you feel that way :)
photography1990 1 year ago
i love ur voice :) n tks for the tip too.
bachu247 1 year ago
@bachu247 haha thanks mate :) i appreciate it.
Cheers on the compliment :)
photography1990 1 year ago
You can set phtotoshop so you can open jpegs in camera raw
firefox81 1 year ago
@firefox81 but it wouldn't have the same information. The camera doesn't keep the RAW settings.
photography1990 1 year ago
Love the choice of music!! :)
1rhett1 1 year ago
@1rhett1 Thank you :) i loved the song when it came out, and still do :) plus i thought it added a certain calmness and relaxation to the video :)
photography1990 1 year ago
Thank you very much for your info. I have a 16gb card, so I guess I just gotta go out there and experiment with RAW and Jpeg - identical pictures and see what results I get. Thanks again.
22raffles 1 year ago
@22raffles no worries :) yeah its all user preference. Let me know how it goes, post a link to a photobucket or somethign :)
photography1990 1 year ago
I see what you mean, but weighing up the pro's and con's of faffing about with Raw files (like losing half the space on your mem card or only being able to open my raw files with the program that came with the camera - Sony, and to be honest, I can do more in CS4 with a jpeg than I can with a Raw file in that program ) I find myself thinking I'd rather work in Jpegs. I don't want to sound negative and I'd like to work in Raw, but looking at the results of both formats, Raw doesn't seem worth it
22raffles 1 year ago
@22raffles No i understand :) When im just shooting normal images i shoot JPEG. But, for example, recently i have been doing long exposure waterfall shots at night. For this, i use my 16gb card and i use the RAW output method. I currently have almost 350 images on the card and no problem at all. It all depends on the size memory card you have, i have a 32gb card for when im going out and need to take alot of raw images. THe negatives are that you take up more space on your computer & memory card
photography1990 1 year ago
Yup, I open my Jpeg pics in the program you are using in this video, do exactly the same editing you have done and then at the bottom right I get the option to open or cancel image. Open image throws my now modified Jpeg into CS4, where I can carry on changing it if I wish or just save it. I'm confused because everywhere I look on Ytube people make it sound like you have to and can only change all these things in RAW format, but I am doing it in Jpeg and getting the same results!? ta 4 help btw
22raffles 1 year ago
@22raffles ahh i get you.
yeah once its edited, you can save it as the photoshop which will keep it with the edits as layers, if you SAVE AS then you will keep the raw image as the source and you will have a secondary (ie the jpeg) but as soon as its jpeg you cant go back. i take them in raw then save a copy as jpeg, so i can go back and edit them again later if needed. Once the raw is edited, you will have the edits still so its better than a base jpeg if you get what i mean :) no worries :)
photography1990 1 year ago
OMG... I have never been SO confused! Where to start? When I open a jpeg pic on my pc, it opens first in camera raw - yes, Camera Raw... I can then change all the settings like you have in this vid, and then click open and it opens in CS4 where I can save it or continue to adjust it some more. However I can't open a raw file in camera raw...what's that all about?
22raffles 1 year ago
@22raffles so you make the changes then open it into photoshop? Then save it as a new image as either photoshop format or JPEG for uploading to the net :)
photography1990 1 year ago
Comment removed
setosail 1 year ago
Respond to this video...
photography1990 1 year ago
damn phone LOL
NikonTom28 1 year ago
@NikonTom28 haha i know :(
photography1990 1 year ago
If you shoot RAW does it give you any more benefits on simple editing sites such as Piknick? Will it looks better, or worse, or the same?
setosail 1 year ago
@setosail Not sure what Piknick is sorry, i only really use photoshop. In photoshop it opens a menu that you do not see unless you open a RAW image. The only way to tell for you is to try it :)
photography1990 1 year ago
wow, how you save raw for internet websites? I guess you converted to JPG ...ill prob find out by the time someone reads this :)
rickalex21 1 year ago
@rickalex21 well if your uploading to the internet you have most likely modified them already, so converting to JPEG is fine. If you save it as a large image and dont compress you will loose no image quality, its if you take the image as a JPEG you cannot modify it like you can with a RAW image.
photography1990 1 year ago
Great, RAW is universal.
papirus1995 2 years ago
@papirus1995 No it is not. Each vendor has it's own format, even between models. RAW is a joke. The effect in this video is more own to a badly setup colour management config, then the "power" of working with RAW.
If you really really need RAW, you probably need more experience with your camera and lenses. If you really really need more dynamic range, you need HDR processing, not the bag of hot air that is 12/14 bit RAW.
retepvosnul 1 year ago
@retepvosnul I wouldn't go as far as saying RAW is a joke, nor someone who uses RAW images needs more experience with their camera. If you are shooting in an 'unstable' weather or doing a once off job such as a wedding then i believe you should use RAW because it gives you the safety of being able to edit the images if there is one little imperfection. Better to be safe then sorry, and if you miss that 'million dollar shot' because a program wont bring out that over-processed jpeg its your loss.
photography1990 1 year ago
@photography1990 And if you had that Zeiss lens instead of the Tokina one, you'd also could make that argument. Same goes for camera bodies, filters, flashes, and even inches lacking in legheight. So people without a 1D and Zeiss distagon collection are losing out.. Tosh, I say.
More world press photo's where shot using the good old "sunny 16" rule of thumb then using the best of the best practices in photography.
It is the same non-sense as hardcore audiophiles profess. Trivialities.
retepvosnul 1 year ago
:) :) :)
fpiclan 2 years ago
haha fpi your good looks!
photography1990 2 years ago