RAW disadvantage

Dolby

Dolby

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
39,123
Reaction score
6,138
I created a thread on RAW quite a while ago, but as I'm on a phone, can't seem to search/find - so I'll create another ...

What are the disadvantages of RAW? From what I see its slow on the camera and needs a larger capacity card - both due to filesize. Someone also mentioned it slow on a PC? But not sure what she has.

The last disadvantage is odd - because many people say that different manufacturers have their own standards and people need software if I send ... But I've always thought the point was to actually convert to jpg yourself after you process? So you wouldn't be sending RAW ever?
 
On my canons . . . RAW fills up the buffer quicker so where as I can take 99 jpgs I'm limited to 15 RAW or 24 mRAW (which is my preferred file these days on the 7D) before the buffer is full.

The file sizes are considerably larger (8mb jpg vs 25mb RAW vs 17mb mRAW) both on the card and computer.

Since the computer does the RAW processing there is an overhead there too when the RAW file it hits your hard drive but most modern computers handle it very well.

You wouldn't usually send someone a RAW file but if you did you could mitigate any incompatibilities by converting it to DNG.
 
Thanks bwana.

Offtopic : I've decided on a camera, assuming it comes out : Canon 60D.

All rumours point to an announcement this month - so here's hoping ;)
 
Dolby said:
Thanks bwana.

Offtopic : I've decided on a camera, assuming it comes out : Canon 60D.

All rumours point to an announcement this month - so here's hoping ;)
Click to expand...
As long as you've got the money to spend and you're not in a hurry. :)
 
Dolby said:
The last disadvantage is odd - because many people say that different manufacturers have their own standards and people need software if I send ... But I've always thought the point was to actually convert to jpg yourself after you process? So you wouldn't be sending RAW ever?
Click to expand...

RAW is your negative, so hang on to it. I will never send my RAW files to anyone (I only shoot RAW) - they can have my modified file, and then not even the full size file...
 
BigAl-sa said:
RAW is your negative, so hang on to it. I will never send my RAW files to anyone (I only shoot RAW) - they can have my modified file, and then not even the full size file...
Click to expand...
That can all change if you've been commissioned and they request the RAW files.
 
bwana said:
That can all change if you've been commissioned and they request the RAW files.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no reason on this earth why they should want the RAW file unless you've signed over the rights of the pics??
 
BigAl-sa said:
There is absolutely no reason on this earth why they should want the RAW file unless you've signed over the rights of the pics??
Click to expand...
Some people/companies want to work on the photos for themselves and the best way to do that is from a RAW file.

As long as it's been arranged beforehand I've got no problem with it. It's got nothing to do with signing over the rights - they're not mutually exclusive.
 
bwana said:
As long as it's been arranged beforehand I've got no problem with it. It's got nothing to do with signing over the rights - they're not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with you. I can remove your parameters from the RAW file and put mine in there, then what do you have? Your word against mine?

I certainly don't believe in the integrity of my fellow man.
 
BigAl-sa said:
I don't agree with you. I can remove your parameters from the RAW file and put mine in there, then what do you have? Your word against mine?

I certainly don't believe in the integrity of my fellow man.
Click to expand...
Witnesses, a contract stipulating that I was there, and I can file copyright before I've submitted the photos. There are plenty of ways to CMOB. ;)
 
The only reason I can think people might be reluctant to give the person paying for your work a raw file is possibly embarrassment if you had to rely on post processing just a little too much. ;) :)

Giving someone a dng file is not transfer of ownership. Furthermore a dng succeeds the creation of a cr2 so it's easy to establish who created the image in the first place.
 
Last edited:
bwana said:
On my canons . . . RAW fills up the buffer quicker so where as I can take 99 jpgs I'm limited to 15 RAW or 24 mRAW (which is my preferred file these days on the 7D) before the buffer is full.

The file sizes are considerably larger (8mb jpg vs 25mb RAW vs 17mb mRAW) both on the card and computer.

Since the computer does the RAW processing there is an overhead there too when the RAW file it hits your hard drive but most modern computers handle it very well.

You wouldn't usually send someone a RAW file but if you did you could mitigate any incompatibilities by converting it to DNG.
Click to expand...

Stupid question probably but have you tried SDXC instead of SDHC cards?
 
AstroTurf said:
Stupid question probably but have you tried SDXC instead of SDHC cards?
Click to expand...
Not really, I mostly use CF cards. :)

My 1Dmk3 does take both in which case I write jpgs to the SD slot (which will soon be occupied by an 8gb Eye-Fi card) and raw to the CF. My other camera is CF only and I've just ordered a 32gb 45MB/s card for that. :D
 
Last edited:
Off topic : Why do you need a 1D and a 7D? ;)
 
Is that time in the next few months? ;)
 
Dolby said:
Is that time in the next few months? ;)
Click to expand...
Nah, my 1Dmk3 is still less than a year old so it will be a while before I upgrade - barring any unforeseen calamities with my current bodies . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X