EOS 20D and RAW Processing

[Neil]

Originally Posted by haddonite

Do most of you guys take digital photos in RAW file mode, and convert later, or do you use JPEG mode

Neil

Hi Neil
Nice name. I being a belt and braces man also take in both. I do use the RAW files most; they have a 16 bit depth and have more information in them. Jpeg have 8 bit and have been processed in the camera, I must admit that some of the Jpegs look better than when I have converted them from RAW.

Neil

[haddonite]

Hi Neil! same name, same interests, it would seem!

Folks, I'm still ploughing through the manual (that is with the D70s), trying to get my head round some of the settings. There is a setting for RAW and JPEG together, i.e image recorded in both file formats. Is this the one I should be using, or RAW on its own

Neil

[Alan]

Neil, experiment and try all options. Use the one that suits you!

[Neil]

Originally Posted by haddonite

Hi Neil! same name, same interests, it would seem!

Folks, I'm still ploughing through the manual (that is with the D70s), trying to get my head round some of the settings. There is a setting for RAW and JPEG together, i.e image recorded in both file formats. Is this the one I should be using, or RAW on its own

Neil

Hi Neil

I would say RAW only, if you want more control of your files. If you are short of storage memory then Jpeg are typically only half the size of RAW files, but with less control of your final photos. As I have said I do record in both and compare the results.
Neil

[carlj]

Neil, am contemplating shooting just raw to free up space on memory card. But the ability to nip into highstprocessingshop and get prints there and then still remains a lure!
Carl

[haddonite]

The memory card in the camera is 2 gig, so I don't think space will be a problem. Like you Carl, I'll set the camera for both types, then if I mess up with the RAW images, I've got a safety net with the JPEG type.

By the way, guys, you all post great photos in the Gallery!

Neil

[Jon]

Originally Posted by Neil

Hi

If you are unable to open RAW files then I would just turn of RAW files in the menu and only take Jpeg files until you can open RAW files directly. The Jpeg files are all about 2.5 Mb and RAW are all over 7 Mb it depends on the detail in the photo you are taking. The figures I have quoted are average of the photos I take. I have Photoshop elements 3 that came with my 20D, I would think that works with RAW files but have not had a go with it. If you want it and send your address by PM I will send it to you.


Neil.

Neil thanks for the offer of Elements 3, the one that came with my camera was Elements 2, (which is what I got with my Eos 300D), I uploaded it just in case there were some minor version updates, but no good. I would like to take you up on the offer of Version 3 but I think it may land you or I in trouble as I would have to mention the registration number and if it is already registered to you there could be problems?? Whatd'ya reckon? Jon

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Jon

Neil thanks for the offer of Elements 3, the one that came with my camera was Elements 2, (which is what I got with my Eos 300D), I uploaded it just in case there were some minor version updates, but no good. I would like to take you up on the offer of Version 3 but I think it may land you or I in trouble as I would have to mention the registration number and if it is already registered to you there could be problems?? Whatd'ya reckon? Jon

Hi Jon
I have just found the software; unfortunately it is also version two that came with my 20D. It has the registration number on the sleeve to install it. I have opened it but not installed or registered it, so it would not be a problem for some one to use it.

Sorry Neil

[MalcolmX]

if i may i would like to add a an opinion . raw for most amateurs is a bite of a red herring . certainly it gives more post processing power to your photograph . this may be what some professionals need particularly in the publishing world . however if you are a photographer rather than a computer operator a jpeg take on the largest setting when printed at a4 with the recommended sharpening will be indistinguishable from a raw converted to tiff (with the same parameters applied ) without the workflow attendant with raw .
i take about 250 shots at a session and i do not want to spend hours in front of the computer correcting white balance contrast etc that i could easily have got right in the camera m my camera produces a large raw file and i get about 50 shots on a 1 gig card which i download in the field ,i did start of with raw files abut the work flow time for me was prohibitive and i have switched back to jpeg. i do however back up to a CD and an external hard drive before i start any work on the files.
the best and easiest raw converter is raw essentials which will give a conveted file that can be printed directly with the camera software (canon)
i hope this is some help

[pxl8]

I agree to a point but there will be differences between the two, the raw software will give better sharpening/noise reduction. It will also have a noticable affect on the tonal curves of the data. This is without changing any values for exposure, WB, etc.

Of course not everyone will notice those differences so you could argue it's a pointless exercise. Of course those who do see the difference will notice the lost potential.

But, regardless of how much or little post work you do, being happy with your results is all that really matters.