Raw photo file my first time

[Badrottie]

I never used to taking raw photo shot until recently I started learning to use manual mode instead of Auto. Raw only work with manual mode and other mode. Still learning how to control shutter speed and aperture plus ISO...That is very challenge for me that is because I am not ready for dSLR just yet.
Anyway, I want to see how raw photo works with Aperture and I find a good learning experience how to change it to your taste.
What I am confused about JPEG file...You can change anything with JPEG just like with RAW file. What did I miss something? For example I can change exposure or highlights setting with JPEG and RAW. I always thought JPEG file has very limit on how you can change it.... Raw file gives you unlimited way to change anything right? Like I said I am still learning to use Raw file from now on.

 

[Apple fanboy]

I never used to taking raw photo shot until recently I started learning to use manual mode instead of Auto. Raw only work with manual mode and other mode. Still learning how to control shutter speed and aperture plus ISO...That is very challenge for me that is because I am not ready for dSLR just yet.
Anyway, I want to see how raw photo works with Aperture and I find a good learning experience how to change it to your taste.
What I am confused about JPEG file...You can change anything with JPEG just like with RAW file. What did I miss something? For example I can change exposure or highlights setting with JPEG and RAW. I always thought JPEG file has very limit on how you can change it.... Raw file gives you unlimited way to change anything right? Like I said I am still learning to use Raw file from now on.

A RAW file captures more data than a JPEG. So in other words if you have under exposed your photo, you can recover it further with a RAW file than a JPEG. Of course you should still try and get it right in camera, but it gives you more options in PP.
Good luck with shooting manual. It just takes a little trial and error. Practice makes perfect and all that.

 

[Badrottie]

A RAW file captures more data than a JPEG. So in other words if you have under exposed your photo, you can recover it further with a RAW file than a JPEG. Of course you should still try and get it right in camera, but it gives you more options in PP.
Good luck with shooting manual. It just takes a little trial and error. Practice makes perfect and all that.

I shot under-exposed raw picture and opened CS6 then I am able to recover it perfectly. How fun is that?

 

[swordio777]

A jpeg is a lossy image file. That means it will look the similar on most computers, and the quality will degrade every time you edit the file and resave it.

A raw file is not an image file. It is simply information about what the camera saw at the time of the exposure. From that information, your raw converter will generate an image. This is why the same raw file will look different in different raw convertors - they interpret the information differently. You cannot edit a raw file, because you cannot change what the camera saw when you pressed the shutter. When you import your raw file, the raw converter will generate an image based on the raw information. If you make an edit, you are not changing the raw file; instead the raw converter will take into account the raw information, then the change you want to make and it will generate a completely new image based on this updated information. It will generate a new image from all the information available, each time you make a change. For this reason, edits made in a raw converter are completely non-destructive.

As you've noticed, the raw file also contains more information than is displayed in a JPEG. This is because the camera manufacturers want to keep a certain level of contrast in their jpeg files - if they showed all the information captured, the jpeg would be extremely flat. By shooting raw, you have access to all the information the camera captured, and can therefore create an image that looks just how you want.

I hope that information helps you understand the difference between an image file and a raw file.

All the best.

Iain

 

[Badrottie]

A jpeg is a lossy image file. That means it will look the similar on most computers, and the quality will degrade every time you edit the file and resave it.

A raw file is not an image file. It is simply information about what the camera saw at the time of the exposure. From that information, your raw converter will generate an image. This is why the same raw file will look different in different raw convertors - they interpret the information differently. You cannot edit a raw file, because you cannot change what the camera saw when you pressed the shutter. When you import your raw file, the raw converter will generate an image based on the raw information. If you make an edit, you are not changing the raw file; instead the raw converter will take into account the raw information, then the change you want to make and it will generate a completely new image based on this updated information. It will generate a new image from all the information available, each time you make a change. For this reason, edits made in a raw converter are completely non-destructive.

As you've noticed, the raw file also contains more information than is displayed in a JPEG. This is because the camera manufacturers want to keep a certain level of contrast in their jpeg files - if they showed all the information captured, the jpeg would be extremely flat. By shooting raw, you have access to all the information the camera captured, and can therefore create an image that looks just how you want.

I hope that information helps you understand the difference between an image file and a raw file.

All the best.

Iain

Thank you very much for all the informations. I did not know that and today I imported some pictures and open Aperture you are right I noticed two different raw and jpeg picture, jpeg pic looks bit brighter than raw pic... I cannot tell which is better because raw pic looks little dark. I suppose jpeg pic is better than raw pic for printing or post on social media?

 

[robgendreau]

Thank you very much for all the informations. I did not know that and today I imported some pictures and open Aperture you are right I noticed two different raw and jpeg picture, jpeg pic looks bit brighter than raw pic... I cannot tell which is better because raw pic looks little dark. I suppose jpeg pic is better than raw pic for printing or post on social media?

JPEGs often look punchier because they interpret the RAW data in that way. The first view Aperture shows you of the RAW is more neutral, since the whole point is to decide for yourself what you want. Different cameras use their own software to produce JPEGs, and some cameras allow settings like "vivid" or " neutral" that cause the camera to produce different JPEG renditions.

Many social media sites will not accept RAW images, or if they do, THEY convert them automatically. You should adjust the RAW image to your liking, then export it either directly from Aperture to the site as a JPEG, or to your filesystem, and then upload it from there. The JPEG you produce from the RAW is gonna be different than the one from the camera. And it could have other edits, filters, crops, etc applied too.

 

[Toutou]

jpeg pic looks bit brighter than raw pic... raw pic looks little dark. I suppose jpeg pic is better than raw pic...

No, there simply is no "RAW pic". RAW file is, well, raw. It's not a picture yet. It's just data about how much light each pixel on the sensor absorbed during exposure. You think you're seeing a "jpg pic" and a "raw pic", but you're in fact seeing the same raw data (created by the exposure) processed by the camera (the jpg) and by your Mac with default settings.

You take a photo, the sensor measures the amount of light and creates a RAW file. Then the built-in image processing algorithm comes saying "well, I think this data would look pretty good if i maybe increased the contrast, applied this amount of sharpening, lit up the shadows here and there, and yeah, this is good. Let's make it a JPEG picture (PICTURE!!) for the user to see."

When shooting in raw, the sensor does its thing, a raw file gets created and that's it. You get to process it and make a picture out of it. You choose the amount of sharpening, you can correct the exposure, colors, white balance etc.

So to answer the last suggestion - JPEG is better for posting on social media because you can't post a raw file anywhere. It's not a picture.

 

[Badrottie]

No, there simply is no "RAW pic". RAW file is, well, raw. It's not a picture yet. It's just data about how much light each pixel on the sensor absorbed during exposure. You think you're seeing a "jpg pic" and a "raw pic", but you're in fact seeing the same raw data (created by the exposure) processed by the camera (the jpg) and by your Mac with default settings.

You take a photo, the sensor measures the amount of light and creates a RAW file. Then the built-in image processing algorithm comes saying "well, I think this data would look pretty good if i maybe increased the contrast, applied this amount of sharpening, lit up the shadows here and there, and yeah, this is good. Let's make it a JPEG picture (PICTURE!!) for the user to see."

When shooting in raw, the sensor does its thing, a raw file gets created and that's it. You get to process it and make a picture out of it. You choose the amount of sharpening, you can correct the exposure, colors, white balance etc.

So to answer the last suggestion - JPEG is better for posting on social media because you can't post a raw file anywhere. It's not a picture.

Oh right, I wasn't reading very carefully. Now I get it...Raw file NOT raw pic that is.... alright....

 

[Badrottie]

JPEGs often look punchier because they interpret the RAW data in that way. The first view Aperture shows you of the RAW is more neutral, since the whole point is to decide for yourself what you want. Different cameras use their own software to produce JPEGs, and some cameras allow settings like "vivid" or " neutral" that cause the camera to produce different JPEG renditions.

Many social media sites will not accept RAW images, or if they do, THEY convert them automatically. You should adjust the RAW image to your liking, then export it either directly from Aperture to the site as a JPEG, or to your filesystem, and then upload it from there. The JPEG you produce from the RAW is gonna be different than the one from the camera. And it could have other edits, filters, crops, etc applied too.

I see because I uploaded raw files to iCloud Picture I suppose like you said they convert them automatically.

 

[tomnavratil]

When it comes to shooting RAW, the good thing is it can save your butt when it comes to shooting important events like weddings. I'm all for "getting the exposure right in the camera" however mistakes do happen. In those situations, RAW can be helpful thanks to all the information being saved.

One thing to remember though, it's better to have an underexposed image rather than overexposed one becase you can't really do anything with burnt pixels - there's no information recorded there.