RAW vs. JPEG: The Cost Factor

[vladimir]

because dodging and burning in the darkroom was skilled art, doing it in photochop is voodoo black magic that didn't involve the skill of the mouse clicker.

Nobody cares about the skill that went into it--all they care about is the end result. Are you shooting digital? Why not go back to film to show some real skill? I have a camera and housing I can sell to you real cheap. I might even have some Velvia in a freezer somewhere.

 

[Gilligan]

Also, while we're at it, is there a major difference between the Canon housing and the (more expensive) Ikelite housing that both Adorama and B&H sell.

I use Canon housings and I will share some shortcomings with them:

1. The locking latch may eventually crack from repeated usage due to the pressure put on it when closing the housing door at the point where the O-ring seats. My G10 housing has a cracked locking latch but is still usable. Prevention = close the door by hand pressure then flip the locking latch closed.

2. The tripod mount is a metal plate attached by four screws to polycarbonate thread posts (as are most polycarbonate housings). Holding the camera in your right hand to work the shutter/zoom control with a tray/arm/strobe setup puts more pressure on that tripod mount than it is designed for. End result over time, depending on usage, is a broken tripod mount. My G10 housing is no longer usable. Prevention = Use a secondary method to assist in support mounting the housing to the tray as shown on MY WEBSITE OR Use a two handled tray which only helps if the right handle allows you to work the shutter/zoom controls while holding the handle. The Ike housings use dual screws to mount them to their trays. I can't say how strong they are as I don't know. And no, you can't always hold the rig by the left handle and work the shutter/zoom with your right hand.

3. Some of the G series housings have "mold release lines" from production. They can be pronounced enough to cause a leak or a flood. They can be sanded down. My G10 housing did not have them but my G12 housing did. I also show them on my above mentioned website

Hindsight is 20-20 and you have mine.

 

[azscubadude]

forget raw. If you require photochopping to fix what you can't get right in the first place, then you are just a post image engineer instead of a photographer.

What an absurd and ridiculous statement.

 

[HowardE]

What an absurd and ridiculous statement.

Not absurd or ridiculous. Many photographers don't spend time color correcting their images, many photographer purists feel exactly what he said.

There are many that feel that true photographers know how to use shutter speed, f-stop, and lighting effects to create the correct images without the use of any post processing effects.

 

[pjhansman]

Not absurd or ridiculous. Many photographers don't spend time color correcting their images, many photographer purists feel exactly what he said.

There are many that feel that true photographers know how to use shutter speed, f-stop, and lighting effects to create the correct images without the use of any post processing effects.

True, not absurd or ridiculous.....just an arrogant and narrow-minded opinion that assumes that his/her way is the only way, and that everyone who uses Photoshop has no photography skills.

I expect the transition from an abacus to a calculator had the same response.

 

[azscubadude]

forget raw. If you require photochopping to fix what you can't get right in the first place, then you are just a post image engineer instead of a photographer.

Not absurd or ridiculous. Many photographers don't spend time color correcting their images, many photographer purists feel exactly what he said.

There are many that feel that true photographers know how to use shutter speed, f-stop, and lighting effects to create the correct images without the use of any post processing effects.

So you're telling me that you are such a purist you only take one shot of any subject knowing you have all your setting correct, lighting is perfect, no scatter in the photo, no shadows, strobes in perfect position, you only manual focus and you never look at the LCD screen.. knowing your first shot is perfect every time? If not you are contradicting your own statement.

How many shots of each subject do you take. Do you take 1, 5, 10, 20, more? If you take more than one, adjusting any settings, what is the difference between that and using Photoshop or Lightroom to do the same thing, then looking at your images and Exif data in post processing so you can see the difference between the shots and settings used to learn for future conditions.

Do you ever have to crop, rotate or adjust image size, change to monochrome ? How do you do that. Or is it okay to use part of the technology but not all of the technology.

Now if that is the way Lwang really feels he should not have stated.. "If you", he should have stated "I" (meaning Lwang)... and no one would have cared if he wanted to live in the past. But blanket statements that everyone else is wrong because they don't follow his archaic way of doing things is absurd and ridiculous.

I remember many MANY famous film photographers deriding the advent of digital almost to the point that it was sacrilegious, stating that you would have to pry the Kodak Ecktrachrome film out of their cold dead hands. I wonder how many still have their film cameras and dark rooms collecting dust while they pine for the good ole days. I seriously doubt there are very many.

 

[bullshark]

• So my question is: Is there a camera and housing with RAW capabilities that's as good as the DC1400 at a similar price point? Or does RAW simply cost more? What do you think is the best RAW-capable camera-housing-strobe setup at a price comparable to the DC1400?

The old adage: You get what you pay for.

RAW is much more important than just white balance. Jpeg is (even in the first case) only an estimate of what the sensor saw. The camera chooses a quality level for the estimate as well as interpreting the white balance.

Underwater photography takes a lot of time and effort. Hidden costs are everywhere:

• You have to carry it.
• You have to pack it.
• You have to assemble it.
• You have to charge it.
• You have to take pictures.
• You diving will be changed.
• You have to care for it.
• You have to worry.
• You have to download.
• You have to develop.
• You have to pore over hundreds of photos.
• You have to make thousands or millions of decisions.
• You have to spend Hours and hours of your time.
• You have to store all this work.
• You have to back up all this work.
• You have to upload.
• You have to learn and learn and learn.

The real cost in $$$ compared to the cost in personal time is nothing. If you can't afford a camera good enough to make all that expenditure worthwhile, then wait till you can. In addition to RAW you need zoom, macro, manual mode, Shutter priority, Aperture priority, flash control and EV control. With those tools you can at least polish skills and learn the ropes, above and below the water.

As another post pointed out, CHDK makes almost any Canon P&S into a RAW camera and housing are quite affordable. I believe there a re number of P&S cameras that do RAW. There is used equipment available on EBay and at REEF photo Video.

 

[Tigerman]

Not absurd or ridiculous. Many photographers don't spend time color correcting their images, many photographer purists feel exactly what he said.

There are many that feel that true photographers know how to use shutter speed, f-stop, and lighting effects to create the correct images without the use of any post processing effects.

Theres many who feel doing crack is a good thing too...

Its not so much a matter of replacing skill with computer. You still have to be able to take good pictures to get the depth of field you want, the lightning effects you want and the composition you want. Post-processing is simply a tool that allow you to compensate for the fact that the camera CAN NOT see what you see in all conditions, regardless of how good a photographer you are. This is down to technological limitations mostly in the image sensors and also the fact that if you use the JPEG files from the camera THEY ARE ALREADY post-processed in a way you have no control over by the software in the camera.
The raw files allow you to bypass this post-processing done in the camera.

Heck, you can use the RAW files without tweaking them too if thats what you want.

 

[deeper thoughts]

interesting!

 

[dhaas]

OK, once again I'll play.........

I understand what RAW does even from way back in 2001 when I bought my FIRST digital camera. JPEG even up through 2007 or so was called a "lossy" format allowing the camera to "make decisions" versus playing Monday morning quarterback on your computer.

JPEG engineering and algorithms have advanced tremendously since then. I personally have gone back and forth with digital SLRs shooting RAW or Fine / Large JPEGs on trips and now shoot Fine / Large JPEG exclusively.

Today even the lowliest small sensor Canon camera has JPEGS in decent light that look great.

Prints up to 20 X 30 from JPEGS produced by any digital SLR if exposed properly and slightly adjusted will make stunning prints. I have one customer who makes 24" X 36" prints on his mega buck Epson printer from JPEGs and sells them for nice $$$$$.

So the argument you "can't get a decent print or good shot from JPEGs" is total crappola'.......

Now if you are shooting in bright light available light and can attempt to white balance then YES, RAW will allow for more post processing adjustment. But many, many pros have been fooled looking at side by side prints up to that 24" X 36" made from RAW and JPEG files.

Using a computer to make your well exposed, in focus keepers is no different than what we did with film negatives or slides printed in a darkroom. Anybody who says they can always "get it right in camera" is lying.......It's NEVER perfect.......

Finally, flareside, as you challenged please post correct specs. The Ikelite AF35 has a guide number of "9" for METERS. It's 16 UNDERWATER for FEET (the chart spec is below.) Many, many Ikelite AF35 shooters are more than happy with the light output.

Ikelite AF 35 Specifications.

Energy Rating ......	35 watt-seconds
Coverage Angle ......	70° (80° with diffuser)
Firing Modes ......	Auto (TTL), Full (Manual), 5 Fractional powers
Guide # feet (ISO 100) ...... meters (ISO 100) ......	28 surface (16 underwater) 9 surface (5 underwater)
Color Temp ......	5700K
Batteries ......	4 "AA" Alkaline / NiCad / NiMH (not included)
# of Flashes ......	300 full power
Recycle Time ......	2.5 seconds
Weight in Air ......	590g (20oz)
Strobe Size ......	8 x 12cm (3.2 x 4.7in)
Depth Rating ......	90m (300ft)

Is 78 degree beam angle enough? I think so in single or duals as photos I've posted using them show. Hell, I've POSTED photos on Scubaboard I shot with a Tokina 10-17mm FISHEYE lens at 10mm lit with ONE Ikelite DS51 (same beam angle of 78 degrees.) No one could tell............

NO STROBE NO MATTER HOW BIG WILL PRODUCE BRIGHT COLORS AND COVERAGE TO A SUBJECT MORE THAN 4' OR SO AWAY. I don't care how big it is at 4' from your subject the LIGHT from your flash is going to travel through 8' of water (!!!!!)

The Sea and Sea and INON strobes are very nice products. Their "sTTL" works well if the user understands it. But too many UW shooters don't dive enough, shoot UW photos often enough and think they can "guess" better exposures than modern automatic systems can produce IN MILLISECONDS.

So use RAW if you want to spend MORE time working on your photos than a decent JPEG will produce IF YOU SHOT IT WELL initially.

Hell, if I've upset people bursting their bubble I might as well go all the way and say it: People keep crap.......YES, crap photos taken too far away, too dark, no color, OOF (out of focus) and THEN expect RAW to "save" their image.

Ain't gonna' happen folks no matter how much you wish for it. I know because I've been there for many years.

The most valuable key on your camera and the computer is the "delete" key

Just one old guys' opinion!

David Haas
www.haasimages.com