If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Remember people who forced you to watch their slide shows?
On Mon, 21 May 2012 13:18:56 +1000, "Trevor" wrote:
: : "Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message : news : Trevor wrote: : BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space! : :-) : : And that's bad because? : : I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage space. :-) : (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and : storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days) : : And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in : shooting RAW, and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being : saved which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later. He said : the only difference was a very small loss in detail. For someone who : taught photography, the least he could have done is mention that his : option may suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography. But he : obviously had no idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant : either, and his photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations. I can muster a bit of sympathy for what it must be like to be a newspaper photographer, with the constant deadline pressure and crappy reproduction of one's photos. When I shoot an event (always in RAW), the first thing I usually have to do is convert a few images to JPEG and make them available to our local newspapers. That can be a bit of a nuisance, especially if the event ends late at night. But I cover an event every couple of weeks, on average, which is nothing like doing several a day with even greater deadline pressure. So I can understand the temptation of relegating everything to quick and dirty procedures, eschewing such niceties as RAW mode and unsharp masks, as long as the editor doesn't give me a hard time. Come to think of it, do we have any newspaper photographers (active or retired) in the group? I can't recall anyone mentioning having been one. Bob |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Remember people who forced you to watch their slide shows?
On 2012-05-26 12:47:00 -0700, Robert Coe said:
On Mon, 21 May 2012 13:18:56 +1000, "Trevor" wrote: : : "Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message : news : Trevor wrote: : BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space! : :-) : : And that's bad because? : : I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage space. :-) : (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and : storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days) : : And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in : shooting RAW, and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being : saved which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later. He said : the only difference was a very small loss in detail. For someone who : taught photography, the least he could have done is mention that his : option may suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography. But he : obviously had no idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant : either, and his photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations. I can muster a bit of sympathy for what it must be like to be a newspaper photographer, with the constant deadline pressure and crappy reproduction of one's photos. When I shoot an event (always in RAW), the first thing I usually have to do is convert a few images to JPEG and make them available to our local newspapers. That can be a bit of a nuisance, especially if the event ends late at night. But I cover an event every couple of weeks, on average, which is nothing like doing several a day with even greater deadline pressure. So I can understand the temptation of relegating everything to quick and dirty procedures, eschewing such niceties as RAW mode and unsharp masks, as long as the editor doesn't give me a hard time. Come to think of it, do we have any newspaper photographers (active or retired) in the group? I can't recall anyone mentioning having been one. Bob Then why not shoot RAW + JPEG? ....and since you have the full RAW file it isn't even necessary to have the JPEG at full size, or compression. A newspaper is going to be printing halftones anyway, so image quality is not one of their great priorities. As has been stated in this thread, shooting RAW+JPEG is not too much of a penalty memory-wise. For the few occasions I need to have immediate sharing access to images for some folks (in your case newspapers), I intentionally change from my usual RAW only to RAW+JPEG. With my D300s & its dual card slots, it is simple to save the RAW files to the CF card and the JPEGS to the SDHC card. Even with a single memory card system, memory is cheap. With my G11, RAW+JPEG is my standard recording mode as that is the camera the instant gratification snapshots are primarily sourced from -- Regards, Savageduck |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Remember people who forced you to watch their slide shows?
On Sat, 26 May 2012 13:59:44 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: : On 2012-05-26 12:47:00 -0700, Robert Coe said: : : On Mon, 21 May 2012 13:18:56 +1000, "Trevor" wrote: : : : : "Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message : : news : : Trevor wrote: : : BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space! : : :-) : : : : And that's bad because? : : : : I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage space. :-) : : (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and : : storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days) : : : : And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in : : shooting RAW, and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being : : saved which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later. He said : : the only difference was a very small loss in detail. For someone who : : taught photography, the least he could have done is mention that his : : option may suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography. But he : : obviously had no idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant : : either, and his photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations. : : I can muster a bit of sympathy for what it must be like to be a newspaper : photographer, with the constant deadline pressure and crappy reproduction of : one's photos. When I shoot an event (always in RAW), the first thing I usually : have to do is convert a few images to JPEG and make them available to our : local newspapers. That can be a bit of a nuisance, especially if the event : ends late at night. But I cover an event every couple of weeks, on average, : which is nothing like doing several a day with even greater deadline pressure. : So I can understand the temptation of relegating everything to quick and dirty : procedures, eschewing such niceties as RAW mode and unsharp masks, as long as : the editor doesn't give me a hard time. : : Come to think of it, do we have any newspaper photographers (active or : retired) in the group? I can't recall anyone mentioning having been one. : : Bob : : Then why not shoot RAW + JPEG? : ...and since you have the full RAW file it isn't even necessary to have : the JPEG at full size, or compression. A newspaper is going to be : printing halftones anyway, so image quality is not one of their great : priorities. As has been stated in this thread, shooting RAW+JPEG is not : too much of a penalty memory-wise. In my case, the answer is that I'm not that good. The pictures I produce always seem to need cropping, white balance adjustment, brightness tuning, etc. And I can make those fixes more effectively in RAW than in JPEG. I'm not particularly concerned about memory. I work for our Information Technology Department. I can get as big a computer, and as much disk space on our servers, as I need. In my cameras I use 16GB CF cards, and I can't remember the last time I had to change cards during a shoot. (At events I almost always use two cameras, so I have a capacity of about 1000 shots.) Bob |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Remember people who forced you to watch their slide shows?
On 2012-05-26 14:29:41 -0700, Robert Coe said:
On Sat, 26 May 2012 13:59:44 -0700, Savageduck wrote: : On 2012-05-26 12:47:00 -0700, Robert Coe said: : : On Mon, 21 May 2012 13:18:56 +1000, "Trevor" wrote: : : : : "Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message : : news : : Trevor wrote: : : BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space! : : :-) : : : : And that's bad because? : : : : I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage space. :-) : : (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and : : storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days) : : : : And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in : : shooting RAW, and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being : : saved which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later. He said : : the only difference was a very small loss in detail. For someone who : : taught photography, the least he could have done is mention that his : : option may suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography. But he : : obviously had no idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant : : either, and his photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations. : : I can muster a bit of sympathy for what it must be like to be a newspaper : photographer, with the constant deadline pressure and crappy reproduction of : one's photos. When I shoot an event (always in RAW), the first thing I usually : have to do is convert a few images to JPEG and make them available to our : local newspapers. That can be a bit of a nuisance, especially if the event : ends late at night. But I cover an event every couple of weeks, on average, : which is nothing like doing several a day with even greater deadline pressure. : So I can understand the temptation of relegating everything to quick and dirty : procedures, eschewing such niceties as RAW mode and unsharp masks, as long as : the editor doesn't give me a hard time. : : Come to think of it, do we have any newspaper photographers (active or : retired) in the group? I can't recall anyone mentioning having been one. : : Bob : : Then why not shoot RAW + JPEG? : ...and since you have the full RAW file it isn't even necessary to have : the JPEG at full size, or compression. A newspaper is going to be : printing halftones anyway, so image quality is not one of their great : priorities. As has been stated in this thread, shooting RAW+JPEG is not : too much of a penalty memory-wise. In my case, the answer is that I'm not that good. The pictures I produce always seem to need cropping, white balance adjustment, brightness tuning, etc. And I can make those fixes more effectively in RAW than in JPEG. So? Neither am I. Shoot WB auto, don't bother with cropping other than to standard sizes required by the newspaper. If the brightness/contrast isn't to your liking out of the camera, just hit it with "auto contrast" & "Auto tone". In most cases you shouldn't even have to bother with that. Your standard of perfection isn't required in a World where newspapers are happy to use unprocessed camera phone images. Shooting for yourself and /or a client who cares about image quality and composition is one thing, one where tweaking a RAW file is preferred. That is my usual practice. However submitting a jpeg capture to a newspaper, where the photo editor is probably going to make his/her crops to fit, is a quick and dirty affair not worth exerting the same post effort as you would for your RAW files. (see note on camera phone images) Newspaper images are not client PR, or magazine shots, or fine art. Hell! For the most part they aren't even worthy of online publication. I'm not particularly concerned about memory. Good! I work for our Information Technology Department. I can get as big a computer, and as much disk space on our servers, as I need. In my cameras I use 16GB CF cards, and I can't remember the last time I had to change cards during a shoot. (At events I almost always use two cameras, so I have a capacity of about 1000 shots.) Bob Yup! I use 16GB CF cards and 8GB SDHC cards. I usually shoot RAW only with overflow going to the SCHD card. If shooting RAW+JPEG RAW is recorded on CF, JPEG on SCHD. I carry extra memory. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Remember people who forced you to watch their slide shows?
On Sat, 26 May 2012 15:09:52 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: : On 2012-05-26 14:29:41 -0700, Robert Coe said: : : On Sat, 26 May 2012 13:59:44 -0700, Savageduck : wrote: : : On 2012-05-26 12:47:00 -0700, Robert Coe said: : : : : On Mon, 21 May 2012 13:18:56 +1000, "Trevor" wrote: : : : : : : "Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message : : : news : : : Trevor wrote: : : : BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and : storage space! : : : :-) : : : : : : And that's bad because? : : : : : : I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage : space. :-) : : : (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and : : : storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days) : : : : : : And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in : : : shooting RAW, and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being : : : saved which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later. He said : : : the only difference was a very small loss in detail. For someone who : : : taught photography, the least he could have done is mention that his : : : option may suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography. But he : : : obviously had no idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant : : : either, and his photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations. : : : : I can muster a bit of sympathy for what it must be like to be a newspaper : : photographer, with the constant deadline pressure and crappy : reproduction of : : one's photos. When I shoot an event (always in RAW), the first : thing I usually : : have to do is convert a few images to JPEG and make them available to our : : local newspapers. That can be a bit of a nuisance, especially if the event : : ends late at night. But I cover an event every couple of weeks, on average, : : which is nothing like doing several a day with even greater : deadline pressure. : : So I can understand the temptation of relegating everything to : quick and dirty : : procedures, eschewing such niceties as RAW mode and unsharp masks, : as long as : : the editor doesn't give me a hard time. : : : : Come to think of it, do we have any newspaper photographers (active or : : retired) in the group? I can't recall anyone mentioning having been one. : : : : Bob : : : : Then why not shoot RAW + JPEG? : : ...and since you have the full RAW file it isn't even necessary to have : : the JPEG at full size, or compression. A newspaper is going to be : : printing halftones anyway, so image quality is not one of their great : : priorities. As has been stated in this thread, shooting RAW+JPEG is not : : too much of a penalty memory-wise. : : In my case, the answer is that I'm not that good. The pictures I produce : always seem to need cropping, white balance adjustment, brightness tuning, : etc. And I can make those fixes more effectively in RAW than in JPEG. : : So? Neither am I. : Shoot WB auto, don't bother with cropping other than to standard sizes : required by the newspaper. If the brightness/contrast isn't to your : liking out of the camera, just hit it with "auto contrast" & "Auto : tone". In most cases you shouldn't even have to bother with that. Your : standard of perfection isn't required in a World where newspapers are : happy to use unprocessed camera phone images. : : Shooting for yourself and /or a client who cares about image quality : and composition is one thing, one where tweaking a RAW file is : preferred. That is my usual practice. However submitting a jpeg capture : to a newspaper, where the photo editor is probably going to make : his/her crops to fit, is a quick and dirty affair not worth exerting : the same post effort as you would for your RAW files. (see note on : camera phone images) : : Newspaper images are not client PR, or magazine shots, or fine art. : Hell! For the most part they aren't even worthy of online publication. I see your point, and there's a lot of evidence to support what you say. But I have the good fortune to find myself, as much by dumb luck as by demonstrated skill, in a situation where photography is a significant part of my day job. If I screw it up, it isn't going to be because I ever deliberately produced less than my best work. Bob |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Remember people who forced you to watch their slide shows?
"Robert Coe" wrote in message ... In my cameras I use 16GB CF cards, and I can't remember the last time I had to change cards during a shoot. I can, it was back when 1GB CF cards were still considered big, and expensive :-( Besides multiple cards I had a hard drive backup device I no longer use. Trevor. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Remember people who forced you to watch their slide shows? | George Kerby | Digital Photography | 31 | June 4th 12 12:05 PM |
we need people to be on reality televison shows | Clyde Torres | Digital Photography | 3 | September 4th 04 04:38 PM |
we need people to be on reality televison shows | [email protected] | Photographing People | 0 | September 4th 04 07:16 AM |
we need people to be on reality televison shows | DaveHodge | Film & Labs | 1 | September 4th 04 07:14 AM |