Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by Phil66, Jan 9, 2012.

  1. Phil66

    Phil66 Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 27, 2011
    Ello all,

    I have a new G3.

    Can someone please explain the pros/cons of using RAW?


  2. mnhoj

    mnhoj There and back again

    Dec 3, 2011
    Los Angeles
    Real Name:
    John M
    Here's a fairly short basic explanation...

    RAW vs JPEG
  3. Hyubie

    Hyubie Unique like everyone else

    Oct 15, 2010
    Real Name:
  4. Chuck Pike

    Chuck Pike Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 3, 2010
    Charlotte, NC.

    If you liked working in a darkroom you are going to want to shoot raw. You can go back years from now and rework a photo as you get better at post processing. If you shoot jpg, you destroy parts of the image each and everytime you save an image. I sell my work for publications, and they all want raw, so if you were to end up with a killer image, you might not be able to market it. If you are just wanting to take snap shots, and have no interest in Post Process you are better off shooting jpg.

    Images for books, magazines and calendars | photosbypike
  5. sprinke

    sprinke Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 5, 2011
    Pasadena, CA
    Real Name:
    I never worked in a darkroom but I shoot RAW. Does that mean if I had picked up photography back in the day, I would have been a darkroom rat?
  6. Markb

    Markb Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jun 9, 2011
    Kent, UK
    Real Name:
    How times change. Once publications all wanted slides and "snapshots" were all manipulated at the minilab :wink:
  7. dcassat

    dcassat Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 16, 2011
    If you are someone who wants the highest quality photos from your camera and that is a priority, you should shoot RAW. It's really that simple. It will probably take you a little more time but then quality usually requires some sacrifice.

  8. Phil66

    Phil66 Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 27, 2011
    To be honest I view most on my PC Monitor which probably can't display the quality anyway. But, I will get an HD monitor one day and then maybe I will regret it.
    Is there a huge difference or is it subtle?
  9. dcassat

    dcassat Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 16, 2011
    There are two scenarios that have occurred for me.

    If the photo was shot in good light and was uncomplicated then the differences made by using RAW would be subtle (but knowing what I know now, I'm not sure I could go back).

    If there are issues with the photo's color, white balance, contrast (from shooting into the light, for example) it's best to process the RAW file to correct this as it will yield the best results. You can process the .JPG and fix the issues but again the quality will be degraded somewhat. The .JPG contains a fraction of the total amount of data that was in the original photo so there is less to work with when adjusting these settings after the fact.

    If you're still on the fence about this issue you will need to play with both and make the comparison yourself since this does fall into an area of subjectivity.

    Good luck, it would be good to hear your observations if you decide to do your own testing!