Raw vs Jpeg?

[csa mt]

Would someone be able to process both of these, so that I can see the difference Raw makes? Right now, I can't get Raw to work with Elements, and wish to see the difference, before I invest in more software.

Thanks in advance! (I'm hoping you can open the Raw file!)



Sorry, the Raw file would not load.

If a Moderator could delete this thread, I'd appreciate it; I don't see any way I can.

Thanks

[Donald]

Carol

You can't post a RAW file into the forum. You would have to load it up to a file sharing site (just like I did with the one I gave you the link for) and then make the link available for people to download.

Can you explain what you're doing to try and open the file?

Are you opening Elements and then going 'Open' and going to the file in question? When you do that it should automatically open it in ACR.

[csa mt]

Hi Donald, I replied before I saw your post. I cannot open Raw in Elements, as ACR does not support my camera, and the update that does include my camera has to be done manually. Since I'm not a computer wiz, I don't want to take the chance of messing something up by doing it manually.

Right now, I do not have a file sharing site.

Oh well, another thread showing my ineptness!

[Donald]

Oh well, another thread showing my ineptness!

Not at all. What is shows is that you've managed to work out that you can't use ACR at the moment in the way that I described

[Mike Buckley]

This entire post has been edited now that I've seen earlier posts.

Carol,

Comparing the post-processing of a RAW file and a JPEG done by others is not valid for many reasons not worth going into, especially considering that you haven't experienced using both file formats first-hand. Your best bet is to download a free trial of Elements and to use ACR yourself to help determine whatever might be helpful to you.

[Manfred M]

I can only see the jpeg file, not the RAW one.

The question you ask is not all that simple to answer, as your choice of colour space, the RAW performance of your camera (12-bit or 14-bit), the way that the jpeg algorithm compresses the image, your final output medium; print (including size of your print) or screen (including type of computer screen) or internet, etc. all have a bearing on the final answer you are looking at.

If you can't get RAW to work with elements, chances are that your version of Elements is too old and you need an updated RAW converter that has your camera in it.

From a purely theoretical standpoint, there is a definite advantage in using RAW if you plan to do a lot of data manipulation, especially if you use a high gamut workspace (ProPhoto, for instance). That being said, you have to understand that a RAW file will require more manipulation to get it to look like your straight-out-of-camera jpeg; as your camera applies shapening, contrast and possible additional saturation to the image it proceses. You have to do all those things to RAW by yourself.

By the way; this image appears to be underexposed; the metadata suggests you have done so by 2/3 stop.

[DanK]

Comparing the post-processing of a RAW file and a JPEG done by others is not valid for many reasons

+1 this.

The main difference is that raw allows you more flexibility. There is no one appearance that goes with either format.

[csa mt]

Mike, thanks; however I do have PSE11 now, but the ACR that I have does not support my camera. As I explained, this would have to be manually added, and I'm not comfortable trying that.

[Mike Buckley]

You could download the trial version of PSE 12, which presumably includes the version of ACR that supports your camera model without you having to make any manual changes.

[csa mt]

Thanks again everyone!

[Shadowman]

You might also want to consider RAW vs DNG, with a DNG converter (available through Adobe) you can convert your RAW file, keeping it intact, to a workable DNG format and still get the most of the capabilities achievable with RAW.

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloa...atform=Windows

[Manfred M]

DNG format and still get the most of the capabilities achievable with RAW.

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloa...atform=Windows

How about all of the capabilities as DNG is nothing more than a "wrapper" for RAW files. The only thing you lose when you convert your file to DNG is to use a third-party RAW converter.

[Glenn NK]

RAW vs JPEG?

This has been beat to death on every photo forum I know of.

And a good many verbal fights that became very nasty are the legacy of those RAW/JPEG threads.

There are advantages to both formats - and the advantages/disadvantages will be different for everyone - so there is no quick easy one-size-fits-all answer. And there never will be.

Even if I knew your requirements, preferences, knowledge level, etc. I shouldn't and wouldn't provide advice - it's something that everyone has to decide for themselves.

Just "google" raw vs jpeg. Plenty of good (?) advice.

Glenn

[Stagecoach]

Hi Donald, I replied before I saw your post. I cannot open Raw in Elements, as ACR does not support my camera, and the update that does include my camera has to be done manually. Since I'm not a computer wiz, I don't want to take the chance of messing something up by doing it manually.

Right now, I do not have a file sharing site.

Oh well, another thread showing my ineptness!

Hi Carol,

If as you say your version of Elements will accept the ACR version compatible with your camera model loading the updated ACR version is very easy. I did exactly that a while ago to update my versions.

I'll try and get time today to write down the simple procedure in detail for you to follow, should you wish to do this.

Grahame

[NorthernFocus]

Hey, Carol. If I understand the gist of the OP, you are trying to decide whether there is any benefit TO YOU of investing further time/effort/finances into software that will allow you to process RAW files. IMO if you feel like you are currenty limited in what you've been able to accomplish by editing jpeg, then you have your answer. Probably the most noticeable difference to most people is innadequate detail in highlights and shadows. If you feel like you're missing a lot of detail at the extreme ends, then post processin in RAW will help. Others may chime in with differences between 8 and 16bit, color gamuts, etc, etc. But all of those things tend to manifest themselves most as loss of detail at the high and low ends.

By the way, what camera are you shooting?

[ajohnw]

The camera is a good point Dan. When threads crop up like this and a shot is posted a right click and properties shows in this case a small sensor bridge camera. It's about time some one asked.

In that case this may mean 10 bit raw and it can be very difficult to process it on some cameras. I'm away from home otherwise I would try and find some samples and see.

John
-

[csa mt]

Dan, I did not feel I was limited in what I've been able to accomplish with Jpeg. However, when posting photos here, I've been prompted that I could do much better by shooting in Raw.

Yes, as John said I have one of those small sensor bridge cameras. It's a FZ70. (1/2.3" sensor) I do not have the means nor the necessity to invest in top pro gear for what photography I do. I think my photography & equipment may fall way short of what others have & do here.

[ajohnw]

You could upload a raw file here Carol but do use this link. Some sites are using the filebin name dot whatever and then trying to get people to log in with facebook,

http://filebin.net/

John
-

[lukaswerth]

Oh well, another thread showing my ineptness!

Carol,

first of all, my two pennies on your quote above: in this regard, I also gladly take advice from others here. But Photography is about light, contrast, composition, not about computer skills. Sites like this are about sharing knowledge.

Second, I used to use a drop box, but I have to recall the name - perhaps just google "free drop box" and you will most likely find what you need.

Third, I don't know which camera you use, but the difference between raw and jpeg is like the one between day and night: if you are serious about developing/editing your images, raw is the way to go. In your image above, the contrast and the color of the sky, the appearance of the clouds, brightness, contrast, hue of the foreground, of the whole image, can be - not just manipulated, but really developed in the sense of being shaped by you so much more efficiently. A jpeg is just an average development applied by the camera program itself.

You do need to update your ACR to get you camera profile if you are serious about presenting your images in a personal way.

Lukas

[Mark von Kanel]

Once again we all get technical for a simple question.

Shoot RAW you can edit as much as you like and lose no data/image quality that you dont want to lose. editing JPEGS in PP it is more likely to give you noticeable image degradation

if your adobe software doesnt support your camera, download adobe dng converter (its free), convert to DNG and your elements will then open your raw file.

simples