RAW file format

[Khokhonutt]

I know I am late to this thread but since we did just upgrade our computer and I do have to purchase new software (to work with Vista), I want to make sure I am understanding this correctly.... could I use Lightroom only and not have to purchase PSE6 in order to process my photographs?

Our old computer was SO old, I could not shoot in RAW - the machine was overtasked with simply uploading the jpgs. I am planning on shooting RAW now but thought I needed to upgrade my Photoshop Elements to work with Vista and add Lightroom for RAW.

I am excited to get started because we have a 'beast' of a computer now AND a big extermal hard drive!

That's going to depend on what you're used to doing with your photo editing software. IMHO Lightroom is stellar for light and color processing. I also use it for leveling. I don't like the red eye reduction as much as other apps I've used. I also have not found any ability to do any 'other' processing, like painting people and things out of a picture or making other 'artsy' adjustments to your photos. From what I understand, for the other stuff you're going to want to look at Elements or something similar.

 

[WeLoveNemo]

While I am slowly introducing myself to shooting RAW and mastering shooting in settings other than "auto" , my comfort level is still letting my camera (Nikon D50) help me by shooting JPG when I really don't want to risk missing pictures. How helpful is Light Room with JPGs processing? I am currently using PSE5 but find going picture by picture a bit tedious. I very rarely go beyond levels, sharpening, color filtering, cropping, straightening, etc...

And on another note, will I ever feel less overwhelmed by my learning curve?

 

[handicap18]

While I am slowly introducing myself to shooting RAW and mastering shooting in settings other than "auto" , my comfort level is still letting my camera (Nikon D50) help me by shooting JPG when I really don't want to risk missing pictures. How helpful is Light Room with JPGs processing? I am currently using PSE5 but find going picture by picture a bit tedious. I very rarely go beyond levels, sharpening, color filtering, cropping, straightening, etc...

And on another note, will I ever feel less overwhelmed by my learning curve?

With my D50 I only shoot RAW now. For the images that I feel need help I'll use Lightroom to post process and convert them. Otherwise I'll just use Picture Project that came with the camera. I've found that for some reason Lightroom likes to darken my images automatically slightly and that can be annoying when I know that in camera it was fine.

I rarely use PSE now unless I want to do something with layers.

I don't think there is a risk of losing any pictures by shooting RAW, not sure what you mean by that.

The learning curve will vary depending on the person. I used a film SLR for years and took photo classes in high school, but never really did much with the knowledge or equipment. When I finally went to the D50 it took a good 6 months to get comfortable and even now after almost 2 years I'm still not all the way there, though my understanding of exposure and what affects what has improved greatly. This is especially true because of this board and a few other resourses. "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson has also been a big help with the learning curve.

 

[alan]

WeLoveNemo,

If you are finding the learning curve overwhelming, then I'll break with most suggestions and say that you might be well advised to drop RAW for now. You've got plenty of time to learn everything, so why not start off with the basics? Learn to frame the picture the way you want. Learn to choose the correct combination of aperture and shutter speed.

That learning process isn't going to be directly affected by whether you shoot RAW or JPG, and you won't have to go through the effort of post processing every darned picture you shoot.

As time passes, and you get better at the basics, you'll start to find occasions where you do want to PP more. Then you'll become aware of the limitations of shooting JPG, and then you will want to move to RAW because you know you need it, rather than some misplaced idea that it's how you should be shooting, but you don't know why.

You can beat the learning curve by breaking it down into smaller parts. Master the basics, then move to the more advanced stuff.

Be aware that if you do this you will have some shots that you won't be able to rescue that you might had you been shooting RAW, but you might have more confidence that you can handle the camera than just letting everything overwhelm you all at once.

The camera should be fun, not a scary nightmare!

regards,
/alan

PS A day where you don't learn something is a day wasted...

 

[WeLoveNemo]

Thanks for the advice and encouragement! I just got the Petersen book based on the raves it receives here. I really like the way he explains concepts.

I also appreciate the need to work on just one thing at a time. Multi-tasking can be very overrated. Over the past year, I have improved my skills at choosing what to shoot and how best to lay it out. I feel very fortunate to have taken many really nice pictures. However, I feel ready to move ahead, technically - but patiently.

 

[Groucho]

If you are finding the learning curve overwhelming, then I'll break with most suggestions and say that you might be well advised to drop RAW for now. You've got plenty of time to learn everything, so why not start off with the basics? Learn to frame the picture the way you want. Learn to choose the correct combination of aperture and shutter speed.

That learning process isn't going to be directly affected by whether you shoot RAW or JPG, and you won't have to go through the effort of post processing every darned picture you shoot.

I have to disagree. Even if you run all your RAW files through whatever software comes with the camera with no post-processing whatsoever, you're still much better off shooting RAW.

Because, some day you WILL be more comfortable post-processing. And maybe there's some really great photos that you shot in the past that your now-more-picky eyes are seeing flaws in, and with the original raw archived away, you will be able to revisit that photo later, adjust white balance, recover some clipped highlights, etc - things that the jpg just won't let you do.

 

[jann1033]

1) anyone know where i can find detailed info about it...adobe search keeps telling me it doesn't exist in the knowledge base and the forums are mostly about installing...i would like to know exactly what each thing ( ie saturation clarity etc) is for and how best to use it

2) if no one knows 1 what is clarity( new on this version) for

3) i thought the little black arrows in the histogram box were just to let you know when nothing was losing detail but it doesn 't necessarily turn black the same space the blown highlights etc go away when you hold alt and slide exposure...so anyone know what that is for>>>again if no #1

thanks

 

[DueyDooDah]

Lightroom has the same features.

Clarity: It provides local contrast enhancement by using fundamentals of an old Photoshop technique. The basic function sets the filter Amount to 20%, Radius to 50 and Threshold to 0. It makes hazy photos clearer, dull images shine, and appearance of depth is enhanced.

Use it sparingly. It may looks geat on a monitor, but printed, the photo may seem too pronounced.

As for the black arrows, they indicate what you think. They are the clip warning tools.You can pass your cursor over them and they will display blue in clipped dark areas (the left one) and red for clipped highlights (the right one). If you click on them, then they toggle them on and off so they stay on even when the cursor is not over the arrow. Know that they take tonal values into consideration so your original may look fine but show clipping warnings after an adjustment.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

The best explanation of Camera Raw I've found is the book Real World Camera Raw with Adobe Photoshop CS3.

 

[jann1033]

thanks

so light room does not use camera raw? i am planning on getting it once i get a new computer. is it it's own raw processor?

 

[mabas9395]

The way I've heard it explained is that lightroom uses the camera raw "engine" but it is essentially the same with a different interface.

When Cameral RAW got all those new clarity, vibrance, etc sliders, so did lightroom.

 

[PoohJen]

Hi Guys! Long time, no post!

I shoot with a Rebel XT and have never shot RAW. I am wondering the purpose and, perhaps, advantage of shooting RAW. I understand it takes up more memory.

Happy New Year and TIA!

 

[JR6ooo4]

It saves the most data. Which is best when you are editing.

Mikeeee

Oh and welcome back. Happy new year to you!

 

[Furgus]

Look at this, Understanding RAW. It should help you get a better understanding of RAW, and help you make the decision if you want to shoot it or not.

 

[jann1033]

nice to hear from you again! i shoot raw all the time, it gives me a lot more latitude in post processing. and if you have photoshop( regular or elements) you can multiple process the files if you really want to( i don't but the option is there)

 

[boBQuincy]

Given the option of capturing in RAW I can't think of many reasons not to. One would be if you just don't have enough memory cards, another might be if you need more frames per second than the buffer can keep up with.

RAW gives us the best our cameras can capture and if we weren't interested in the best we probably wouldn't have to carry large, heavy, expensive cameras.

 

[PoohJen]

Thanks all!

Furgus, I will read that link today.

Janet, what do you mean by "multiple process"

Bob, gotta love large, heavy, expensive cameras! lol You know I am still drooling over that 40D. And with my walk around lens currently broken, that must mean I need a new camera too!

btw, What is the "buffer"?

 

[boBQuincy]

btw, What is the "buffer"?

Our cameras have internal high speed buffer memory that holds the images until they are written to the memory card. Once the buffer is full the camera will not take any more photos until some data is written to the memory card and the buffer has enough space to hold the next image.

I ran out of buffer while taking bracketed exposures of a moving train. My 30D buffer holds about 9 RAW images and once it was full I had to wait, missing a few good photos. If I were capturing JPGs it wouldn't have been a problem since so many more will fit in the buffer.

If I were capturing JPGs I also would have captured images that were not as good, a black steam locomotive against a bright blue sky is more than a JPG can deal with. This compressed image is nowhere near as good as the original.

 

[jann1033]

if you take a bunch of photos under the same conditions( ie maybe a family gathering sitting in the same room) you can convert one raw image( ie the exposure, brightness, etc) then process the rest with that same one set of conversions automatically( it's in file, i think in the editor don't think you can get to it in the organizer) so you don't need to convert every photo manually from raw to jpg. you can also use it to water mark or add a caption

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Michael Reichmann and Jeff Schewe (co-author of Real World Camera RAW) are putting together a video tutorial on Adobe Camera RAW. I loved their Lightroom video tutorial and thought that their From Camera to Print tutorial was very good as well. If you're looking for a good primer on Camera RAW, stay tuned. This should be released in about a month.

They haven't announced pricing yet, but I'm guessing that it will be about $35. They say it will be about 6-7 hours long.