Free photo gun range 2mb skin#

Anyone who tells you that you’re wrong isn’t respecting your photographic vision.Īnd anyone who tells you that you’re not “pro” because you choose JPEG – and there are plenty who will do this – doesn’t really understand photography. Nothing riles me up more than seeing in the forums where one photographer admonishes another for shooting JPEG, saying “pros shoot RAW”. True, they do. These styles are good enough for some people.

Free photo gun range 2mb skin#

Why not do it in the camera during shooting?Īll digital cameras have some kind of preset styles like these, even if you can’t adjust them. “Landscape” for example will have more saturated colors while “portrait” could result in softer skin tones. I used to shoot in RAW only. I didn’t like the way that Canon or Sony processed JPEGs in-camera. They were just off for my taste.īut after switching to Fuji I’ve really warmed up to the way that those cameras process the JPEGs. I’ve created my own in-camera presets for different situations and desired looks. I’ve set combinations of film simulations, color, noise, sharpness, and toning, much like you’d apply a preset to a RAW file in Lightroom. The left is a processed RAW while the right is a custom JPEG setting with the saturated Velvia film simulation out of an X-T1. Which is better? There is no better, just different tastes.

Wouldn’t it be better if you could just go back to the original negative and make those changes directly to it? It’s like making a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy of a fax of a photocopy.

Keep making changes like this year after year and eventually, you’re left with a muddy mess. In the most basic photographic terms, RAW is the negative and JPEG is the print. Most cameras can record both.Ī RAW file is a record of the light that hit the sensor, with minimal processing, much like film records the light hitting it. RAW files require processing just like a film negative.Ī JPEG is the output, a final product after processing has been applied. Corrections for sharpness, contrast, color, and toning have already been made. It’s what the photographer would walk out of the darkroom with.Īs I mentioned in the opening, there is no better, only better for you.īut take this into consideration. You walk out of the darkroom with a print and discard the negative. The next year, your taste changes and you want to adjust the color toning. All you have is the print, so you adjust the color directly on the print. The next year you want to decrease the contrast so you try to lighten the shadows and darken the highlights, but you’ve already lost what exists in the shadows so brightening it won’t reveal more. What’s the difference between RAW & JPEG?

Take these into consideration, and then decide for yourself if you should shoot in RAW, JPEG, or both while out traveling the world. Like many of my other posts, I’ll try to keep this more of a big-picture philosophical conversation, absent of bit depth numbers, dynamic range & file size comparisons, and so on. The only truth is that there is no absolute best, only what’s best for you. JPEG conversation is one of those silly controversial things that shouldn’t be controversial. It’s like those other arguments in photography about the “best” camera and is full-frame better than APS-C. I earn a small commission of product sales to keep this website going. Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links.