Hello
I have only used jpgs till today. I am not that good with PhotoShop 7.
Should I try shooting NEF or am I just setting myself up for problems.
Is there a good link on the intracieies of shooting NEF and accessing them in photoshop?
Thanks
DSLRUsers.com
A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.
Should a newbie shoot NEF format?Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Please also check the portal page for more information on this.
Previous topic • Next topic
22 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Should a newbie shoot NEF format?
Spooky, in my opinion, shooting RAW has not much to do with photoshop. You need a RAW editor, once you have adjusted white balance and maybe a couple of other settings, you save as jpeg and you're at the same point that you would be if you shot in jpeg. The difference is you have a lot more room for mistakes in RAW
Last edited by phillipb on Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
__________
Phillip **Nikon D7000**
It's a hard call. Maybe until you get experienced use RAW, allows you to correct beginner mistakes eg. under/over exposure, incorrect wb settings etc
However something should be noted, if you're overseas and you're going to be away from a PC for a while shooting to Large JPEG might be the way to go, just make sure you select the right colormode (eg. II for adobe) and if you're not very good at setting wb make sure you go auto. What this will allow is give you a good chance of taking your CF to a place that has machines like the AGFA eBox to read your CF and develop. Also while there you could get all your CFs burnt to cdrom. There is a less of a chance that anywhere would support NEF.
Can they burn the NEF files onto the CD for you at those outlets? and play around with all the NEF/ RAW files later.
Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Yes you can do that Birddog but say for instance you wanted to do some prints there and then for Nan or your Aunty.
Guess the other option is to shoot RAW + JPEG, if only printing 6x4s some of the other JPEG options might be ok besides Fine.
Hi, I am no expert. But you should learn to use NEF.
Why in the film world you can think of it as the negative compared to a polaroid. If you have the negative --- years later you can get better paper and chemicals (in theory) therefore theoritically you should be able to get better than results you have now. eg. If you have NEF and Nikon release a "newer better editor" you have the "negative" to get all the benefits later...... If you have JPEG - You have the original Polaroid that you can play with though all will be a reproduction. If I am wrong with this analogy please correct me everyone. I'm back
D3s D700 D200, SB-900, SB-800 x2, SB-600 x4
always photography is not just what u take, but the post processing aswell. and as ipv6ready has pointed out, NEF is a digital negative. goto http://www.luminous-landscape.com, they have an articel on why u should shot in raw. to me digital photography is fun in that i have total control over the final output 
No. No one should shoot in RAW.
The fact that I've never shot in RAW shouldn't invalidate my useless above statement. It seems that as we enter Digi photog and processing, there are certain avenues that you can take that develop into more time and money. You can pursue lenses, buying bigger and better glass, you can shoot in Raw, requiring more memory, and better computer (or a reasonably fast computer with more hard drive space and good organization software)plus the NEF software so that PS can recognizeit, and that's not to mention going into things like tripod and head, brackets, lighting systems etc. So we all go down certain avenues and decide where we need to stop as we've satisfied our needs for the time (ie, many of us have SB800, but no more extensive lighting system). Most that post on this site have gone down most of the avenues to a relatively committed extent. I've gone partway down the lens (one fixed, one kit, one tele) and I could go much further but decided to sit on these for the time being until my skills and eye improve a little. The same goes for me in shooting RAW. I don't have the resources necessary to get the memory, software, the time, speed etc to continue to make Photography a passionate hobby of mine. Obviously every option in photography has it's merits, but it also has it's price.
dooda,
You're just one in a small group not shooting NEF/ RAW, which is the benefits of DSLR. I knew your resources is restricted or with the limitation, but when you can afford, are you going to shoot NEF/ RAW? I was same as you when I first have my D100 but my shooting styles has been changed once the price of the memory card dropped and always shooting NEF/RAW, I keep them as the negatives in film day. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
SHooting raw is a virtually lossless option. Shooting jpg is inherently lossy.
If you're going to the trouble of getting good glass, and taking care with your composition in order to get the best possible image, why do you then want to immediately throw away some of the information you've just captured, never to be seen again? Raw gives you far more flexibility than jpg. g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
Get yourself a 1GB card and just shoot in RAW+JPEG mode. Gives you more flexibility, allows you to view when wandering and allows for post processing later when in front of a pc.
Yes, I'll definitly try it and see how it goes--and as it seems that most people keep to shooting in RAW once they start, it's a good chance that I'll be a NEF shooter. But not for sure. I have some disdain with Nikon for not including appropriate software with products to facilitate NEF right off the bat. For a terrific camera/lens maker, they really drop the ball here. Why not up the price $75 and include it? Makes everyone a lot happier.
Until recently I have been a 100% JPEG shooter. Two things changed my mind and have enticed me to have a go at raw:
1. An article on the Sports Illustrated workflow for the superbowl (link posted on this site that I can't find right now) 2. finding RawShooter. If you have a computer with a P4 chip then it runs like a dream. Fast browsing and easy JPEG conversion and FREE (at the moment). http://www.pixmantec.com/index2.html Regards
Jonesy
My favorite analogy for shooting RAW images is a film one:
If you just bought a fantastic new film camera and you were able to get twice as many pictures on a roll of film in this hypothetical camera by shooting half-size frames, would you? Of course not! Get the most out of your camera. Shoot RAW* whenever possible, archive a set of files, then convert a second set of your files to your favorite working format. Re: Shooting Raw* *Shooting in the RAW might also work in some situations, making your subjects either smile or laugh, depending. But that's a whole different subject.  
Spooky
Rawshooter works very well for a D70 but it is still a new program so there are some bugs. If you use a PIII (don't laugh Birdy) or and AMD chip then you might have some problems. Otherwise it is a great little program. Nikon Capture is probably going to give you the best output of all the NEF editors but is is terribly slow with a bit of a clunky interface (it also cost money unless you can 'find' an access code on this forum or dpreview somewhere. Cheers AJ Regards
Jonesy
spooky, Why should you bother with it? saving cost? better appliacation? Or for fun? Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Previous topic • Next topic
22 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|
- Mods Database • The team • Delete all board cookies • Reset blocks • All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]
