Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Trying my best to learn RAW technique but not having much success. I just purchased Elements 7 and a copy of "Photoshop Elements 7 The Missing Manual" which I highly recommend . But even after reading the seemingly dummy proof explanations concerning the RAW technique,I inevitably find myself in a cold sweat curled up in the corner babbeling some undefineable jibberish ! Are there any step by step video tutorials available that show what to do with images I have shot in RAW format. Do I want to convert or not ? I thought that the whole idea was to have the image in the RAW so why do I keep seeing these steps telling me to use the RAW converter to change my image to JPEG or TIFF , PSD ....AHHHHHH !! HELP PLEASE !
RAW is a format - but its unprocessed camera data, like a negative from a film camera. You don't keep the negative as a negative, you process it into a photo (JPEG TIFF etc) so that you can use it (RAW is not an image format its not even a set format itself as it will differ from company to company - even within a company there are different RAW formats).
The advantage is that because you are doing the processing and not the camera, you can define the look of the final image and also have access to better software than it in the camera - even elements sharpening and noise removal is an upgrade over in camera.
Quote: thought that the whole idea was to have the image in the RAW so why do I keep seeing these steps telling me to use the RAW converter to change my image to JPEG or TIFF , PSD
As Alex has indicated, RAW is just the first step. It is the unprocessed image which is produced by your camera.
The important point to note is that ALL digital cameras shoot in RAW. It is just that many of them do the RAW processing themselves and you can only have a JPEG or (more rarely) a TIFF as your end result.
DSLRs and high-end compacts allow you to take the unprocessed RAW out of the camera without the camera attempting to process it. (Except usually for a bit of noise reduction). You do the processing yourself.
That, essentially is the difference. The end product - a TIFF or JPEG - is the same whether you shoot in RAW or you don't. It is just that many consider that self-processing rather than camera processing is better.
I guess what I was trying to say was,if I shoot an image in RAW and then load it onto my laptop, edit it ,then when I am done editing it I want to save it, so I convert it into a JPEG ,isn't this going to compress all the data and create a blocky looking photo, which is what I was trying to avoid in the first place ? Why not just shoot in JPEG to begin with ? I apoligize if my lack of understanding is frustrating to those of you with more experience but I really would like to expand my knowledge of the digital side of photography.
Don't save it as a jpeg because as you say all the data is compressed. Save it as a tiff as this will save all your post processing. You still have your original raw file to play with. I purchased a couple of years ago a book by Mikkel Aaland called "photoshop CS2 Raw" it was very informative. Not sure if its been updated. John
If you're using Photoshop (Elements or otherwise) you can also save as a PSD file, which will allow you the most flexibility to play further later, however for upload to sites, and to print, most places require Jpeg format (although some print places will take TIFF). If you keep the jpeg save quality to its highest setting when saving, it shouldn't be blocky in any way
The weakness of JPEG is that its a lossy save formate - each time you save it you lose data from the file and over time this builds up to damage the overall image. Also the more data you lose the less you can edit the shot before you get blockyness and noise build up due to editing.
My current workflow is to open the RAW in elements, adjust the settings (which by the way are not saved onto the RAW file, instead another file is made which records the settings used = these are then automatically applied to the RAW the next time it is opened for editing, but the original file itself remains unchanged) and then I open it directly into elements for editing (I don't save it as a tiff/jpeg and then open that - no point adding another step to the process).
After that I edit and I now save the original as a PSD and then I will process a 1000pixel shot for the internet as a JPEG and also a 600pixel shot (longest side) for other internet sites.
I don't know if the books and stuff you read used the analogy that a RAW file is similar to a negative?
It's helpful to think of RAW files this way, think of the other files (like JPEGs) as the result of developing those RAW files.
I don't think Elements is the best program for dealing with RAW files.
Other programs remember the processing settings that you've chosen for your RAW files. With those you can go generate a JPEG or other file as and when you need one. There's no need to redo the exposure, white balance, sharpness etc. The program 'remembers'.
With Elements when you quit the program you will lose the changes you've made to the RAW file unless you generate a TIFF, JPEG or whatever.
What camera do you use Keith?
My mistake, misread what you said.
Keith, I sort of get your concern that you're choosing not to shoot JPEG, but in the end you're producing JPEGs to upload to websites.
The important point is that rather than let the camera interpret the raw data into a JPEG in a fraction of a second you're doing it at your leisure, hand optimising, doing the processing yourself, making all of the important decisions rather than have the camera make them for you.
If you start with a JPEG there's far less leeway (some of the decisions have been made, data has been thrown away). That's what you're avoiding by shooting RAW.
Raw rocks i would shoot no other way now if my pic is under exposed or not right which it usually is lol i can edit the heck out of it in ACR without loosing any quality
I'm shooting with a Sony A300 . So I think I understand ...I shoot in RAW then make my own corrections/tweaks and save the finished product as a PSD. Then should I decide to say share this shot with you fine folks I would make a copy as a JPEG so I could post it ?
Sounds about right to me! I always duplicate the raw file so i have one which i edit then save as a PNG (don't know why lol)and if i want to edit it again at a later date i still have the original raw file!
If all you alter is the exposure, contrast, WB, sharpness using the RAW controls then there's no need to save as a PSD.
If you do some corrections to the photo like removing stuff from the shot then save as a PSD
If you're absolutely sure you never want to edit the shot again, you could save it as a JPEG. Trouble with that is should you reopen the JPEG and do any resizing or other work you will have lost some quality.
There's a few camera RAW technique videos in the video tutorial section of this site which I found really helpful when I switched to using RAW, they explain it well and is done in photoshop (which, I assume, is similar to elements, the basics at least, which is what most of the videos cover)
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Login or Join Now
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Related Content
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
foliopic 'Movement' Competition
1st May 2012 - 31st May 2012
This month's competition theme is 'Movement' which can be interpreted in a number of ways. You could photograph an animal running, a person walking or a car speeding...Featured e2 Photo
Featured Directory Listing
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
Interact
Photography Gallery Photography Forums Recent Forum Activity Members' Meetings Members' BlogsSearch ePHOTOzine
Having trouble or would like to make a suggestion? Create a report
Calibrate your monitor so you can see 16 different shades.
ePHOTOzine © 2001 - 2012 Magezine Publishing | Contact Us | Site Map | Top