RAW. What IS it and should I use it?

Mar 17, 2009 by Matt Voran

It used to be that the RAW format was reserved for only the most expensive “pro” level digital cameras, but these days you can get a point and shoot for less than 200 bucks that supports the RAW format, so I thought it would be a good topic for discussion as more and more amateurs are exposed (pun intended) to the RAW format.

What is it?

RAW is not an actual file format, but rather a term describing the native format that your camera shoots in.  For Nikon cameras this is .NEF, for Canon this is RW2 or RC2 depending on the camera.  But for the purpose of this article, just think of RAW as a file format. A file is nothing more than ones and zeroes, encoded by the camera, and then our screens and printers decode that information so that we can see it as an image. RAW does the same thing, but better, in most cases……   See, when you take a picture your camera evaluates the scene, and the current settings and prepares to save the image to memory.  It is at this juncture, that the file format comes into play.  That is because when your camera saves the picture to memory, it is really converting the “raw” image data into digital format and in order to do that, it has to interpret your settings and raw data and make decisions.  If you are set for JPEG storage, the camera will make all of the decisions for you and toss out the rest of the information that is deemed unnecessary to create the final image.  If you shoot in your cameras RAW format, it will save ALL of the information and allow you to make the decisions yourself at a later time. For example if you shoot JPEG, the file will be saved to the memory card with a specific White Balance setting, the one you used.  But if you shoot RAW, it also saves the possibilities of the other white balance settings that your camera is capable of…..so you can change it later……you still with me.

Okay NO, that was just confusing, what’s the difference?

Alright alright enough with the geek speak, this is AlmostProFoto, we focus on the basics.  I know there will be comments from the detail hounds out there, but here is my basic analogy:  Imagine you are preparing a meal rather than taking a picture.  You go to the store and you decide on the spot what ingredients are necessary to make that meal.  Once you get home, if you realize you are missing anything you would have to go back to the store.  Now lets say you could just take the whole store home with you and then decide as your making the meal, what ingredients you would like to use.   Its basic and I am sure flawed, but that is how I think about the DIFFERENCE between RAW and JPEG.  With RAW, you are bringing all the information home with you and then deciding yourself what is necessary to make the image look how you want.  If you shoot JPEG, your allowing your camera to make those choices for you in that instant that you take the picture.

Okay, that makes sense…..SO WHAT!

I hear ya, I do, I am trying.  Lets continue with our cooking analogy.  If you are a professional chef, the chances that you are going to buy the wrong ingredient, or miss one, are probably slim, so why not just get only what you need when you go to the store, as there are some advantages to NOT carrying around all those extra ingredients, not to mention the extra cost.  However, even a professional chef might come across a recipe where, he’s just not sure what ingredients to get so he might get a few options so that he can test back in the kitchen and choose the best one for the final recipe.  Now he’s shooting with RAW and is probably glad he saved himself some options.  It is similar to being on location and lets say you have a scene you want to shoot where the contrast is high and you just cant seem to get a setting that takes everything into account correctly.  With RAW you can take a few shots and figure the rest out later.

On the other hand you have me, the average NOT professional chef/photographer.  I prefer to ALWAYS shoot in RAW just in case I screw something up, I have options.  I cannot however afford to shop the grocery like that……

So….wouldn’t everyone want to just shoot RAW all the time?

Not necessarily, here are some downsides to shooting RAW, which also correlate directly into “pros” for the JPEG format.

1. File Size – RAW files are MUCH larger than jpegs, on my camera a bit more than three times larger.  The jpeg is typically 3mb, the RAW 10mb. That means more space on your memory card and hard drive (although this is not that big an issue with the price of memory dropping way faster than the megapixel capability of cameras is rising.)  It also means longer processing times, so in sports for example, if you are used to shooting in 5fps (frames per second) with JPEGS, you may only get 3fps in RAW.  You might get the same fps with RAW but you will most likely then be getting a shorter burst, so 3 shots in a sequence rather than unlimited (until the cards full) with jpeg.  This is because your camera can only write to the memory card so fast, and the RAW files take longer to write, because they are larger……make sense?  Processing time for RAW files will also be longer everywhere else as well, transferring to the computer, opening in an editor(which is required, see #2) and even sending to a printer or burning onto a CD.  Whatever you do with this file, its going to take longer.
2. Compatibility – That RAW file is proprietary, which means without the proper software, its useless.  Almost ALL cameras that shoot in RAW ship with software to read and convert those files, and there are some great third party options out there as well, my favorite is Adobe Camera Raw, which is integrated with Photoshop.  Jpegs on the other hand, can be transferred directly to any number of devices and software, and are instantly viewable/printable/emailable. (<—- NOT A WORD but should be)  the last point I will make about compatibility, although its a bit outside the scope of this article, and I must say I am not well versed on it, is future compatibility……what do you do if you are saving all your files as .NEF (nikon raw format) and then some day Nikon goes out of business (highly unlikely) and support for that file format drops off the face of the planet.  While this is a scary scenario, it is so unlikely and also preventable (keep your Nikon disc so you always have software that can convert to other formats) it IS a reason that some photographers are wary of the RAW format.  Adobe is trying to solve this with the .DNG format which is meant to be the PDF of digital negatives but so far has not been very widely adopted…..but there are tons of articles out there about this.  Thats all I am going to say about that.

So if I am a professional, and I know that I can get the shot exactly how I want it without shooting RAW, then I might as well take advantage of the speed and ease of the JPEG format.( remember our chef and his ingredients?)  Sure the pixel peepers out there might be able to find some minute quality differences, but unless your shooting specifically to maximize your megapixels for a massive print, who cares.  On the other hand, if I am an amatuer (and I am) and I don’t trust that I will get everything just right the first time, then RAW is a good choice as long as I have the tools (a raw editor and at least 1gig memory for about 100 shots in RAW) and know how required!

Here is another case where jpeg is good to have, lets say I usually shot my more “artistic” shots in RAW but now I am just hanging out at a tailgate and I want some shots for my facebook page.  In these cases I actually dial my camera (10mp) down to 6mp and shoot in medium quality jpeg so that I can just dump those pictures right on my photo gallery with no processing needed.  Much fast than importing and developing them all in RAW and then downsizing them for the web.

Wouldn’t it be great it I could shoot both!?

The truth is that many cameras can!  I have an 8gb card in my Nikon and I shoot in RAW+JPEG mode all the time.  That way I have the ultimate flexibility.  Now I cannot burst shoot 5fps for 10 seconds, but I do not shoot sports or high action anything so, I am perfectly okay with that.  If you shoot sports or high action journalism, you are either NOT reading this because you already know, OR you own or should buy a camera that is capable of shooting high speeds regardless of the file format.

So what should I use?!

Its a personal question with personal answers.  If you cannot make your decision based on what I have laid out here, contact me and we can talk about your specific experience level and needs, and maybe I can point you in the right direction.  Personally, I think that with memory getting cheaper and computers getting faster RAW is the way to go, outside of those specific times when JPEG shines.  If you can shoot both all the time like me, then why the hell not!

That’s my opinion, take it or leave it.  This is always a topic of much debate so let me hear your thoughts.