Rare pierces Posted May 26, 2018 #1 Share Posted May 26, 2018 Real photographers only shoot on RAW. Inspires a chuckle in me every time I see that in a post on some photo forum. RAW is a wonderful option that is grossly overused as a just-in-case-I-screw-up-and-have-my-settings-wrong all seeing recovery option. I swear some people think it will fix a photo shot with the lens cap on! But enough about RAW. If you want to read a fair evaluation of RAW vs. JPEG, I wrote an article on it HERE. Mini-rant is over and I will move on to the reason I was harsh on the RAW-only crowd. I want to point out that if you only shoot RAW, you are probably ignoring a vast resource for creativity that manufacturers have built into that expensive tool you haul around to pretty places. In the menu, look for "Creative Effects", "Picture Effects" or some such term. Under that you will find a whole bunch of settings that you can play with to apply creative effects in-camera. Effects like color separation, antique sepia, faux miniature, etcetera. I have shot with Sony for so long that I only have a passing familiarity with features offered by other manufacturers. Things like in-camera-HDR, multi-frame noise reduction, sweep panorama are available in many brands now but I'm not sure which ones or at what level of camera. Read Your Friendly Menu! Here are a couple shots I made with my A6300 with creative settings. All straight out of camera. Illustration - High setting: Partial Color: Red Rich Tone Mono High Contrast Mono Watercolor Miniature Take camera. Study menu. Choose subject. Take pictures. Have fun! Have a great long weekend! Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommui987 Posted May 26, 2018 #2 Share Posted May 26, 2018 In the menu, look for "Creative Effects", "Picture Effects" or some such term. Under that you will find a whole bunch of settings that you can play with to apply creative effects in-camera. Dave While I keep thinking about experimenting with my camera, Dave actually does so and POST his results! Thank you Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havoc315 Posted May 26, 2018 #3 Share Posted May 26, 2018 Personally, I do almost always shoot raw, but I don’t loom down upon those who shoot jpeg — all depends on whether you feel it’s worth the time to post process. If you hate post processing or find it too time consuming, no shame in jpeg. But in-camera creative features really isn’t an argument against raw —and of those effects are easily applied in post processing. But JPEGs are for those who want a “final” image straight out of the camera. (SOOC). (Or pretty close do final). And in-camera effects are an extension of that — a way to get those effects SOOC instead of post-processing. Here is what I find, for both raw and special effects: I can get some very nice effects with jpegs, including the effects. But I can almost always do slightly better by processing my own raw. Sometimes slightly better, sometimes much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare pierces Posted May 27, 2018 Author #4 Share Posted May 27, 2018 But in-camera creative features really isn’t an argument against raw —and of those effects are easily applied in post processing. Not arguing against RAW. It's true that it's a great tool to squeeze the last little bit out of an image. The truth it that most (and I really mean most) people don't want to spend weeks learning the ins and outs of an editor and additional hours and hours editing after each trip or outing. For those folks, getting a color separation or faux miniature effect with a simple menu choice provides creativity options that took an awful lot of effort and high-end systems to achieve fifteen or twenty years ago. I really am a fan of photography for fun and as a form of relaxation. Some people find peace in the process and love to tweak and fiddle. For them, RAW is a five-course gourmet meal from a twenty page menu. Others just want to grab a burger or at most, order a pizza with extra cheese and pepperoni. In-camera JPEG special effects are fast food and in a modern camera, they can be both nutritious and delicious! :) Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingFlip Posted May 27, 2018 #5 Share Posted May 27, 2018 Take camera. Study menu. Choose subject. Take pictures. Have fun! Appropriate timing. A couple hours before you posted this, I was out in my front and back yards doing my third run of tests of the macro functions on my camera ... particularly focus stacking. Earlier this week I was testing my camera's built-in HDR vs. the iPhone's built-in HDR. In my camera, those two functions are mutually exclusive with RAW. Focus stacking -or- RAW. HDR -or- RAW. And since I don't plan to lug my tripod around on my next vacation, I don't expect to do multiple shots with a variety of EVs just to do HDR in post. Real photographers only shoot on RAW.Inspires a chuckle in me every time I see that in a post on some photo forum. Meh. That one barely gets an eye-roll. The one that gets a spit-take out of me: "It's so cliche to take pictures of tourist attractions. They've been done a billion times. Just buy a postcard; it will be better quality." RAW is a tool. HDR is a tool. Sometimes they're the right tool. But I'm going to take my own photos of the tourist attractions I visit. I'm preserving my experience ... not the experience of the professional photographer whose work is featured on the postcard or calendar. I've never gotten into the "creative effects" photos. (Tying into what I said above ...) I'm generally trying to make my photos reflect my real-life experience (except better composed). I have considered applying those effects to some RAW photos that didn't work out, just to see if I could salvage something better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havoc315 Posted May 27, 2018 #6 Share Posted May 27, 2018 Not arguing against RAW. It's true that it's a great tool to squeeze the last little bit out of an image. The truth it that most (and I really mean most) people don't want to spend weeks learning the ins and outs of an editor and additional hours and hours editing after each trip or outing. For those folks, getting a color separation or faux miniature effect with a simple menu choice provides creativity options that took an awful lot of effort and high-end systems to achieve fifteen or twenty years ago. I really am a fan of photography for fun and as a form of relaxation. Some people find peace in the process and love to tweak and fiddle. For them, RAW is a five-course gourmet meal from a twenty page menu. Others just want to grab a burger or at most, order a pizza with extra cheese and pepperoni. In-camera JPEG special effects are fast food and in a modern camera, they can be both nutritious and delicious! :) Dave All well said. If you’re an amateur and don’t enjoy the processing part of the process, then jpegs and the in-camera effects are great. Even if you’re a pro, but jpegs make more sense for your workflow (for example sports photographers who need to deliver images immediately), no need to shoot raw. Though I’ll add a footnote — if you don’t mind quick easy software— google NIK is free and provides outstanding “creative effects.” They have the best B&W converter anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare pierces Posted May 27, 2018 Author #7 Share Posted May 27, 2018 google NIK is free and provides outstanding “creative effects.” They have the best B&W converter anywhere. Nik Silver Effects is my current favorite B&W converter, though Luminar is growing on me. I just picked up Photolemur to plau with when I heard they were acquired by Skylum. Their AI auto-correction is pretty amazing. I can see it becoming a very popular one-click fix tool in the Luminar menu. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now