Shooting Disney World - RAW vs. JPEG Fine

[ddbowdoin]

Second trip this year and I'd like to get the best shots available. I am pretty comfortable shooting RAW but more so when I am on a site close by so that if anything funky comes up I can always swing by again. WDW doesn't come very often for all of us...

what do you shoot? RAW for better quality but run some risks in your post production or JPEG fine and deal with some compression but avoid large files and time editing.

just throwing this topic out there...

 

[wdwmagic]

My preference is to shoot JPG for the vast majority of the shots, and RAW for anything with difficult lighting that may need a lot of processing.

 

[NowInc]

Both. Most cameras have that option. If the JPG is good..I keep it, but you can save a LOT of headache with a RAW file as well. I would suggest picking up a copy of Lightroom by Adobe. Its cheap, and super powerful..and can edit RAW files like its big brother Photoshop.

(side note: The D7000 has the awesome dual SD card slots so I usually use one for RAW and the other for JPG)

 

[wdwmagic]

Both. Most cameras have that option. If the JPG is good..I keep it, but you can save a LOT of headache with a RAW file as well. I would suggest picking up a copy of Lightroom by Adobe. Its cheap, and super powerful..and can edit RAW files like its big brother Photoshop.

(side note: The D7000 has the awesome dual SD card slots so I usually use one for RAW and the other for JPG)

Are my eyes deceiving me, or is NowInc posting?!?! Welcome back! :wave:

 

[NowInc]

Are my eyes deceiving me, or is NowInc posting?!?! Welcome back! :wave:

LoL...yep. Good to be back and contributing again!

 

[ddbowdoin]

Both. Most cameras have that option. If the JPG is good..I keep it, but you can save a LOT of headache with a RAW file as well. I would suggest picking up a copy of Lightroom by Adobe. Its cheap, and super powerful..and can edit RAW files like its big brother Photoshop.

(side note: The D7000 has the awesome dual SD card slots so I usually use one for RAW and the other for JPG)

The duel slot of the D7000 is an amazing feature!

My D80 does have the Raw+Jpeg option but it eats at cards pretty fast that way. I have CS3 which is perfect because you have to be careful when your camera was produced versus what PS you have. I know that CS3 wont recognize .NEF files from a D7000, you would neeed a newer version of PS... they have a DNG converter but thats a whole different game.

 

[NowInc]

The duel slot of the D7000 is an amazing feature!

My D80 does have the Raw+Jpeg option but it eats at cards pretty fast that way. I have CS3 which is perfect because you have to be careful when your camera was produced versus what PS you have. I know that CS3 wont recognize .NEF files from a D7000, you would neeed a newer version of PS... they have a DNG converter but thats a whole different game.

ACTUALLY...you dont need a new version of PS at all..just an updated version of the camera raw plugin..and the 6.3 release just came out a few weeks ago and works for importing D3100 and D7000 NEFs for all adobe programs (CS and lightroom included). Should auto update for you if you have that option turned on..but in case you dont..

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html

It says its for CS5, but I know people who said it works on older versions, tho I have yet to personally try it personally.

 

[NowInc]

Also..just in case it DOESN'T work..you could always use the free NEF to DNG converter that adobe provides..

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4924 PC
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4923 MAC

Hope this helps!

 

[DVC Mike]

Previously, I always shot JPEG with my D5000 and then D7000.

On my last trip, I shot RAW. There were a few shots that I really appreciated having the 14-bit NEF file to pull details out of the shadows or highlights using Capture NX2.

I would think JPEG would probably be fine for 95% of my shots.

 

[NowInc]

It also comes down to how much post processing you intend on doing (HDR, Topaz etc). JPGs are..lets face it...a low rez format (compared to other options such as tif or raw). Having that extra headroom to work with can really come in handy. The file size is a problem, however with more and more cameras making the switch to SD format, storage is becoming cheaper than film. (I got an 8 gb SDHC card for about 20 bucks a few weeks ago for example).

The BIG issue really is your computer storage, dumping all the photos etc.

My suggestion would be a drobo type array where you can pop in a few large hard drives (working with one now that has 8tb of data at my disposal). Much more reliable than an external HD (I have had SEVERAL die on me over the years), and tho a bit pricey, they work as fast as you'd ever need.

 

[ddbowdoin]

Essentially I back everything on CD's... its a pain in the a$$ but easier than forking over dough for a bigger HD. I have a 500GB which has held up in my iMac (24 inch, pretty nice despite poor optical performance when editing photos versus print)

 

[lumpydj]

I used a 16GB card and shot in both Raw and JPEG. I was able to take over 500 pics on that one card. Also, I have an external Harddrive (750GB) that I download my photos to. I'm too new at Photography to rely on jpeg only. I NEED Raw to help me fix my screw ups.

 

[NowInc]

I used a 16GB card and shot in both Raw and JPEG. I was able to take over 500 pics on that one card. Also, I have an external Harddrive (750GB) that I download my photos to. I'm too new at Photography to rely on jpeg only. I NEED Raw to help me fix my screw ups.

RAW is actually used a lot by pros...I even know photographers that will get really upset to hear that you don't shoot in the format. Like I said in my previous post, Just shoot in both formats. For those who are concerned about space...basically just consider your final output. Are they going to be prints or for web? Adjust your image size accordingly.

 

[Monorail Lime]

Adobe Lightroom makes organizing and processing RAW images a snap. It also has automatic adjustments in every category for those images that don't need extensive post-processing. Why even bother with JPEG when the entire RAW workflow can be accomplished in only a few clicks?

 

[NowInc]

Adobe Lightroom makes organizing and processing RAW images a snap. It also has automatic adjustments in every category for those images that don't need extensive post-processing. Why even bother with JPEG when the entire RAW workflow can be accomplished in only a few clicks?

Sometimes the JPG by itself is great. Those "Great shots" you just happen to get. The RAW is completely..well..raw. 9 times out of 10 I go the lightroom/photoshop route with the DNG, but the jpgs are so small it doesn't really hurt to save them as well imo.