Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

What does one do with PSD files?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

User_Removed
11 Oct 2012 - 8:18 PM

Never keep PSDs at all. I only use CS6 to edit from within Lightroom 4 and save back the edited images into Lightroom in the default Tiff format. I know that would not suit everyone, especially if you want to revisit and revise a Photoshop edit, but for me it is the ideal system.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
11 Oct 2012 - 8:18 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

tomcat
tomcat e2 Member 85907 forum poststomcat vcard United Kingdom15 Constructive Critique Points
11 Oct 2012 - 9:13 PM

Does it matter if the original RAW file is retained?

User_Removed
11 Oct 2012 - 11:06 PM

Lightroom can't save the changes that Photoshop makes to the raw files. Any Photoshop changes would need to be saved as psd or tiff if you wanted to keep layers and selections etc. Or jpeg if you're finished working.

lobsterboy
lobsterboy Site Moderator 1014125 forum postslobsterboy vcard United Kingdom13 Constructive Critique Points
11 Oct 2012 - 11:20 PM


Quote: Does it matter if the original RAW file is retained?

Personally I would say that it is always a good idea. Last week I reprocessed a load of shots I had taken, processed and back in Jan.
Since I first looked at them Lightroom has been updated and the new engine really makes a difference, plus I have learnt new tricks in photomatix.
All of which meant I could produce much better results from the same files than I did 9 months ago.

If I had just processed & deleted the raw files I would not have had that opportunity.

lemmy
lemmy  71807 forum posts United Kingdom
12 Oct 2012 - 12:09 AM


Quote: Last week I reprocessed a load of shots I had taken, processed and back in Jan.
Since I first looked at them Lightroom has been updated and the new engine really makes a difference

I agree about keeping the RAW files. I rcently ran some RAW file shot at 1600 ISI I had from several years ago through the Lightroom noise engine and it was like they had been produced on a different, more modern camera.

Makes you realise how much more detail those older sensors had than could be extracted from them at the time. Also, how the race for more megapixels is less imortant than the quality of those pixels.

I'd never throw away my RAW files any more than I'd have thrown away negatives and just kept prints in film days.

User_Removed
12 Oct 2012 - 8:11 AM

I took Tomcat's question "Does it matter if the original raw file is retained?" to be in response to people saving their work as tiffs.

I would never get rid of raw files for the reasons mentioned above.

Btw it's raw not RAW - it's not an acronym.

lemmy
lemmy  71807 forum posts United Kingdom
12 Oct 2012 - 8:51 AM


Quote:
Btw it's raw not RAW - it's not an acronym.

Google it. You'll see that RAW is used more often then raw or Raw. It's not something about which there are rules but RAW is used to mean the off the sensor information.

Raw has its own dictionary meeting, of course.

Cf Mb MB and many other uses of the upper or lower case to convey a sense that the letters or word themselves do not.

Pedants interlude over Wink

User_Removed
12 Oct 2012 - 9:05 AM


Quote: Google it. You'll see that RAW is used more often then raw or Raw

Google "jealous" you'll see that people use the word wrongly when they should be saying "envious". Doesn't mean they are right.

Raw fish, raw meat, raw data, raw files.

lemmy
lemmy  71807 forum posts United Kingdom
12 Oct 2012 - 9:22 AM

Pedants interlude over Wink

Big Bri
Big Bri  1315557 forum posts England
12 Oct 2012 - 9:56 AM

We used to use the term "RAW format" before it became common in digital cameras, to indicate a file that just had uncompressed pixel data, with none of the accompanying information (even height/width), and in our code sometimes even had to make assumptions from the length of the data stream about what dimensions the image should be. We called it RAW because we saved the files with a .RAW extension (it was all uppercase in those days Wink)
Now it is used more widely and doesn't refer to a specific format, just a type of format, I would agree that it should be called "raw" rather than "RAW" (unless you are starting a sentence, in which case it is "Raw" Wink)

(the pedant's revolt)

User_Removed
12 Oct 2012 - 10:16 AM


Quote: Pedants interlude over

Grin
That should be: Pedants' interlude over, or if only one then: Pedant's interlude over lol

Quote:
Google it. You'll see that RAW is used more often then raw or Raw

I actually Googled it and it isn't, it's slightly more lowercase! Wikipedia and Adobe going with "raw" so there Lemmy Tongue

12-10-2012-10-12-14.jpg

Jestertheclown
12 Oct 2012 - 10:20 AM

Well, I'm really pleased that we got that sorted out.

I can sleep at night now.

lobsterboy
lobsterboy Site Moderator 1014125 forum postslobsterboy vcard United Kingdom13 Constructive Critique Points
12 Oct 2012 - 10:22 AM


Quote: That should be: Pedants' interlude over, or if only one then: Pedant's interlude over lol

Shouldn't it be:
Quote: The Pedant's interlude is over

?

Pete
Pete Site Moderator 1318441 forum postsPete vcard ePz Advertiser England96 Constructive Critique Points
12 Oct 2012 - 10:23 AM

Whenever I refer to my RAW files I'm correct in saying they are RAW files ... Really Awesome Work. Please don't give me the real meaning - I've been deluding myself for years Wink

Last Modified By Pete at 12 Oct 2012 - 10:23 AM
User_Removed
12 Oct 2012 - 2:18 PM

Are you sure that 'A' is for 'Awesome' Pete Tongue

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.