Thanks. I don't print any of my own photos. I upload a JPEG. I think the companies I use only support JPEG. Do you select, the size of the JPEG for printing?

 

Jerry, that's a nice simple explanation. Thanks!

 

Lainey-

I think you're assessment is fair. It's really up to you as to what you want and how to get it.

Now, saying that, here's some more information.

• A typical JPEG is about 10-20% of the file size of a RAW file. That's because there's algorithms to save file space at the expense of some quality. Similar to what BoltonBlue says, the jpeg file has less information because it generalizes some parts of the picture. In some cases, this process can have a dramatic impact on quality, and at other times it may not be noticeable at all. You can often choose the compression ratio in an application. The higher the ration, the less space, and the less quality.
• Another thing that happens when you have the camera shoot just a jpg is that you are trusting the camera to make decisions on that processing when it takes the pictures based on the rules it knows and the algorithms is has for processing. I'd think that if you use the in camera functions to change the image characteristics (vivid, bold, etc...) that would affect the processing algorithms.
• Lastly, the jpg format is lossy. Effectively, every time you adjust the picture and save it, it re-processes it to save space. If you do this over and over again the generalizations made during the first save get worse and worse. Depending on the type of edit. again, the impact can be dramatic or trivial.
• If you choose to shoot jpg only, always use the highest setting for resolution and file size. It will give you the most flexibility at a later date.

Using a raw file, when you open and edit it, the initial raw file stays intact, and you are actually creating a delta file (for me, that's a .xmp file - not sure if that's a Nikon thing or a Photoshop thing). That file has all your changes, so when you open the RAW file again, it overlays those changes. When you are done editing, you then choose the format to save. It can be a jpg (that's what I use). If you were doing graphic work, you might choose TIFF, or any other file formats depending on the need. As you mentioned, I have also printed large format (24x30) pictures from a jpg file from a 6 MP camera. Unless you're right on top of it, you can't tell. The trick is to not manipulate the jpg file too often to preserve its integrity. Also, when you then save the jpg, always use the highest quality - you might only get a 1:2 or 1:3 file size ration, but have a near indistinguishable file when done.

While you can manipulate many things in the jpg file directly, there are some things that I don't believe you can do unless you use the raw file. With a raw file, I can manipulate the exposure and white balance directly. You can do similar tricks on the jpg, but you won't get the same results. With the raw file, you can also go back to the original, manipulate it a different way, and save another jpg to use.

Some also mentioned, and I think its a workflow issue- I often post up just a jpg for many things. For my portfolio, I almost always process raw files, and for printing I always start with a raw file. I only have a 12 MB camera, so while the differential is significant (1.5- 2 MB jpgs to about 11 MB raw files), the total space per image is roughly 13-14 MB. With a newer camera, I could easily see that getting to 20 MB. I've solved that recently with a 3 TB storage system, which is one of the downfalls of digital photography. You don't need box upon box and album upon album to store things, but you do need more disk space. I also have a little script I run that compares the files in a directory, so when I delete the jpg (what I use for quick preview to select what I keep/don't keep), it then removes the raw file. For me that works.

I've been toying with Lightroom and Bridge for processing, and I keep going back to Photoshop. I haven't spent the time yet to figure out the changes I need to make (in workflow mostly) to use the other tools.

Hope that helps

 

For a while I was shooting both RAW and JPEG, but doing that took a lot of space. I use Adobe LR4 and I spent some time watching videos and learning a lot about the program.

I learned a few things for my casual shooting:

-using Basic from the Develop tab is the easiest way to get results.

-presents are fantastic

-I could make any size JPEG from LR4, so they don't look compressed on social media sites like facebook.

 

Thanks, guys. Good explanation Gary. I'm not sure I have the best "eye" when it comes to some of the tones/white balance, etc. I adjusted one RAW file the other day, and when comparing the two, my +1 thought the original looked better than my edited file.

I'm a little lost when it comes to selecting file size and that ratio stuff, but I do save as a high quality when offered that option. Photo scape does offer that option.

I always shoot JPEG at the highest resolution possible. Memory cards are cheap. Maybe I'll pick up a few more.

I do like the idea of having a high quality unaltered RAW file available down the line for different edits.

Maybe for a while, I'll shoot both RAW and JPEG, and do some immediate selection of those pics that I think are keepers and save the RAW files on those, while deleting the non keepers. I still get plenty of non keepers.

When time permits, I'll look a bit harder to find a photography course. There is still much to learn, and down the line, I may move on to learning other processing programs.

Keep the info coming, folks!

 

That's a good idea. I learned that my camera is capable of so much more. I joined the Cleveland Photographic Society and these guys (and gals) are great. I have taken a paid class and they let you attend any future classes for a refresher at no cost.

The next class I take will be for PS Elements.

 

My camera is capable, of so much more, but am I???? Local camera shop owner offers private lessons at $50.00/hr. Out of my budget. There have been other "on the street" seminars, with a photographer and a group (small) . They do this in Boston and other areas. Sounds like a fun day and the price for the day is reasonable. I like the idea of a hands on group class/lesson, working on specific areas.

Some day.....

 

you can try lynda.com. they offer quite a few online classes for many software packages.

Also look for a meetup in your area for a photo club. The prices vary. Our local meetup is $5/year - really just to pay for the site. Everyone who goes volunteers to help move tables, set up the projector, pick topics and events. We have monthly meetings with assignments and then critique each other. some of the working pros do little seminars or we've done trips designed for a special topic. Sometimes on the road, sometimes in a studio.

Other meetups might be $10/$20 a session. I think those tend to run like a class, are held by stores/studios/pros and its a way to make money. Ours isn't.

 

FWIW, I have been shooting raw. Haven't done much with the RAW pics, but I do see the difference between the RAW photo and the jpeg.

 

Hi Everyone! Haven't posted for a while. This topic is interesting.

I shoot only RAW files with my cameras, because I don't want to throw away any pixel information from the digital file. I process in Photoshop CS6 and print off pictures or post on the web in the jpeg format. Even though I might "throw away" 50-80% of the pixel information when I resize for web publication, I find that I can more adjustments starting from RAW. Obviously, storage space could be a problem, but I store all my RAW files on a 3TB external hard drive.