Originally Posted by osbornsm Heya there... just a photo comment... there is some pretty wicked purple fringing around your highlights. Other than that, iti's a shot i'd be proud to
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
09-17-2013, 05:27 PM | #2238 (permalink) | |
Track Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Johnston RI
Posts: 857
Drives: 370 Touring Spt A/t
Rep Power: 16 |
Quote:
|
|
09-17-2013, 05:35 PM | #2239 (permalink) |
Track Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Johnston RI
Posts: 857
Drives: 370 Touring Spt A/t
Rep Power: 16 |
JPEG Discussion
I know its not fashionable but I like JPEG..Unless the exposure is way off, there is no need for radical RAW processing,.and frankly call me lazy..but I figure I paid enough for this camera,so let it do its thing and save me the trouble..
Yes RAW has much more flexibility,.,.,.if you encounter a situation where radical processing is needed...but so far I think its more bother than its worth for the great majority of shots..and in the end looks the same. As for noise, i have a 14x11 print in my hand,,shot at 1600 ISO and I see no noise..and my eyesight is fine.. Plus I can shoot a whole bunch and not worry about buffer overload,. So anyone care to have a discussion on this? This old dog is always open to learning new tricks! |
09-17-2013, 05:35 PM | #2240 (permalink) | |
A True Z Fanatic
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 6,704
Drives: Project: a white one
Rep Power: 512 |
Quote:
And address the CA as mentioned above!
__________________
2009 370Z Sport/Touring/Navigation | see my journal for mods facebook: Be my friend... or not. |
|
09-17-2013, 09:52 PM | #2241 (permalink) | |
A True Z Fanatic
|
Quote:
__________________
Patrick // 06 Frontier 6spd Nismosis // Mods: Uprev Tuned @ Z1 Motorsports: 257whp & 292 ft lbs 09 Pontiac G8 GXP // M6 // Sunroof // Tint... For now |
|
09-18-2013, 10:13 AM | #2242 (permalink) |
A True Z Fanatic
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 5,059
Drives: slowwww
Rep Power: 29 |
Personally, the RAW vs. JPEG debate is kind of silly. They both have their advantages and for the most part a jpeg image can be good enough for certain projects. I tend to shoot more JPEG than RAW in some instances, because processing RAW can be a bit more time consuming. It really depends on the shoot. For family events that will only really see Facebook, shooting RAW is overkill. Your results will be the same as shooting jpeg, but with more work. You don't need the extra dynamic range and white balance data if your shot is pretty close to what you want. JPEG has more than enough data for minor tweaks.
For a professional shoot or stuff you want to end up in your portfolio though, it's worth it to shoot RAW because you want as much image data as possible. It's all about time and money management. It would be more expensive to do a re-shoot for fashion for example, whereas it wouldn't really matter much for snapshots of your company picnic. It's a bit silly to take sides. Some people swear by RAW, others swear by jpeg. Until cameras can handle large, lossless RAW files without breaking a sweat, there will always be a place for a compressed jpeg file. I wouldn't be surprised if something new comes around to replace both in the near future. Lossless data with the ease of jpeg. Just think, we use to think 6 megapixel jpeg files were insanely huge at one point, but technology has allowed for cameras and computers to handle them with ease.
__________________
[09][MB][6-Spd MT][Touring][Stillen Gen III][K&N][Borla CBE][Evo-R] |
09-18-2013, 10:19 AM | #2243 (permalink) |
A True Z Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South Florida
Posts: 3,001
Drives: Q50RS
Rep Power: 25 |
If you know what you want to achieve in regards to color, noise, sharpness, etc, before you shoot, there is no "need" for RAW. For instance, when I shoot a car, I know my white balance is correct, I control the lighting with either my lights, and I can shoot 100 ISO, therefore I only shoot in JPEG. But, last night, I shot a concert in a bar and the lights were dim, unevenly colored, and very unevenly directed. Even using my primes @ ~f/2, I knew I had to crank the ISO up around 2000 to 3200 to shoot handheld, so I shot RAW. This way I can go in later and apply my noise correction and make subtle color balance changes in RAW. If I were to do this in Photoshop with a JPEG (at least with the resources available to me), It'd likely create artifacting and hurt the image quality, which is already less than I wanted due to the high ISO. I'll post some when I finish them.
__________________
-Jay- jonathanjamesphotographer.com |
09-18-2013, 10:39 AM | #2244 (permalink) | |
A True Z Fanatic
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 6,704
Drives: Project: a white one
Rep Power: 512 |
Quote:
Since I run all of my images through Lightroom, I have the option to adjust anything... or not. But at least I have more options and control available if I decide to do something with the image. If it's really just snapshots, something that I'm going to share untouched in a small size, or stuff I'll give away to someone who doesn't possess software that can process RAW, or it will need to be viewed on their computer (such as snapping at a friend's picnic), I'll set my camera to RAW + JPEG Small. It doesn't really take that much extra space on the card. They can have the files they need to post on Facebook and just in case there's something good on there, I'll still have a file I can work with. There was a time when my 6mp 10D was a pretty bad-a$$ camera
__________________
2009 370Z Sport/Touring/Navigation | see my journal for mods facebook: Be my friend... or not. |
|
09-21-2013, 08:19 PM | #2246 (permalink) |
Track Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Johnston RI
Posts: 857
Drives: 370 Touring Spt A/t
Rep Power: 16 |
I agree If the camera can make the correct adjustments no need for RAW..There is a program called Noise Ninja that i used to use but when I switched to Windows 8 all that software for Photoshop Elements was useless..
|
09-21-2013, 09:15 PM | #2248 (permalink) |
Enthusiast Member
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Sacratomato
Posts: 309
Drives: your mama wild.
Rep Power: 13 |
So I haven't told the wife yet but I bought a new macro lens today ... a Canon 100mm 1:1 with USM AF, the works. I took some pictures at the rose garden after the rain this afternoon.
|
09-22-2013, 09:09 PM | #2250 (permalink) |
Enthusiast Member
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Sacratomato
Posts: 309
Drives: your mama wild.
Rep Power: 13 |
Okay, well I told her about this morning. She wasn't too surprised. I've been softening her up for it for a month or so, telling her I was looking at lenses and thinking about buying one pretty soon. We can afford a few luxuries at this point.
|
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DSLR advice | Red__Zed | Photography | 48 | 08-29-2013 10:04 PM |
AUDIO : Bose w/o Nav Upgrades Discussions | Mr_Z | Audio & Video | 14 | 06-24-2013 02:06 AM |
Fluid Swap Discussions | '10Anamoly | Engine & Drivetrain | 8 | 05-18-2012 10:33 AM |
Best Lens for Nikon DSLR? | tmjohansen | Photography | 5 | 01-25-2011 05:54 PM |
Winter Prep + New DSLR | toxik | Nissan 370Z Photos / Spyshots / Video / Media Gallery | 8 | 11-27-2010 06:16 PM |