Does RAW matter? We're gonna look at it from a practical example. I'm Scott from
Photography Banzai. So I have three different cameras with RAW + JPEG. The
first one, the M100. Also have the P1000 from Nikon. That big super zoom I looked
at recently. And also my phone. I used the Open Camera application. It's open
sourced.. It gives you the DNG RAWs. Go through three different photos from each
camera. So first off we've got the 100% crop with the Canon software. Got the RAW on
the one side and JPEG. I really don't see much of a difference in this specific
case. That's just a hundred percent crop. So we could see the details. I'm not really
seeing much of a difference. In this case very similar. There are maybe some slight
differences in detail here and there, but I'm not really seeing a big difference.
That's again with the Canon software. In this case there is a little bit of difference
with the Canon software exported to the TIFF file and then opened up in
Photoshop. Compared to the standard JPEG, maybe slightly different colors. But
noise and such is very similar. So we're using the Acdsee software at this point.
It's doing a lot less processing, but it's still very similar with this 100%
crop on that same photo. Here is the full version. So in this case when I resize to
960 pixels for each one.. Basically that gives you an idea of if you're pushing
to Instagram, Facebook. Whatever website where you don't have super large
resolution. Get an idea to see if they are similar enough that you don't really
need to care except for extreme situations of messed
up exposure or whatever. So in this case the RAW actually is more color fringing.
That wasn't corrected when all the processing that I did, which was nothing...
In that case I just exported through the Acdsee software. Now, it does have a lot of
options, but in that RAW state there will be optical issues that you can correct
depending on your software. In the RAW exported from Acdsee right in the center
you can see this little leaf here... Or whatever it is. It's actually a piece
of grass I guess. But definitely has more detail to it. In the JPEG you're losing
quite a bit. So you can see actually a difference in exposure in this case.
Which is pretty interesting but again you could easily correct or adjust the
RAW to make it look like the JPEG. Basically, you can see a lot of color
noise. So in this case it really depends on how good your software is because I
didn't apply any noise reduction, in this case. I could definitely improve that
situation if I were to adjust the RAW file. So we look at the compacted version
of that file. They're actually very similar. There is more color noise you
can still see in the raw version, but it's not bad. So in this case I would
probably use either one if I wanted to just put some web version out there.
Now let's look at the P1000. In this case this is 100% view of one photo from the
camera shop. Don't really see much of a difference in this specific case at a
hundred percent. There is a little bit more color fringing on the RAW version.
Of course, I'm not correcting any of that stuff. You can see more color noise, but
details are actually relatively similar. The issue with JPEGs when the processing
is not perfect is that you'll get this watercolor-y look which we're gonna see
a lot of with the P1000 and JPEG mode. So I really like having that option to do
RAW with a camera like that that has a small sensor. Because you can really
decide if you want a certain level of noise reduction. You can avoid or at
least potentially avoid a lot more of that issue with the watercolor look to
the photos. But of course that's at a hundred percent. So we look at the full
compacted version. Not really any difference that you can notice. Another
100 percent view of the P1000. Definitely more color noise on one side. But then on
the other side you lose a huge amount of detail. It's just pretty much wiped out
in some areas, but actually in the oranges I do see a slight difference in
shade on the JPEG site which is good. So here's the compacted version. Pretty
similar, but I do prefer the colors from the raw version and of course that's
before processing. It's just more vivid. But with the JPEG you can see even when
it's compacted like this it's got that watercolor-y blotchy look to the
photo. Especially with the Sony logo area of right above there. Definitely not
great. Here's a 100% view on another P1000 photo. In this case you've really got
that watercolor look to the edges of the JPEG. I think that looks really bad and
you've even got some JPEG noise. Or basically when it's compressing the JPEG
file. It gets this weird pattern look to it. Now, you can potentially remove some
of that if you're trying to process a JPEG, but you don't have that issue with
the RAW file. But of course then you've got more color noise and other issues
like that. But it's something you can potentially correct. So here's the
compact version of that one. They are pretty similar just looking at the
screen as it is 960 pixels. There are differences especially.. a little bit more
detail I think on the RAW side when you compress that file. But not a huge
difference. So now we're to the LG Stylo 3 phone with that Open Camera
application that does the DNG RAWs. In this case you can see there's very dark
area. This is a pretty big difference of exposure or at least what you can see in
the photo. That tree area is fully visible on the RAW side, but on the JPEG
side it's super dark. The colors are different.. just a lot of difference. Now,
the text on the JPEG is actually more legible, but you could easily process
the RAW to improve that situation. So here's another one with the shadows
boosted in Photoshop to that JPEG file. You can see that it actually lost a lot
of information from that tree area. Which is pretty serious in this case. I
think it's a big benefit of RAW for the specific use. Because you are losing a
lot of information on that side. So here's the compacted version of the
previous photo. You can see that it is relatively similar, but there's a big
difference in color. You've got more of a purplish hue, which I prefer for the
moment but you could easily adjust that to a more neutral look similar to the
JPEG. Here's another one with the LG Stylo 3. You can see a pretty big difference at a
hundred percent with the textured area right in the center. There's a lot of
compression artifacts and other issues with the JPEG file compared to the RAW.
Of course, the RAW again has more color noise but that's something you can
potentially correct without causing all of those problems. In this case I
increased the exposure 2 stops in Acdsee itself through the RAW editor. So we can
get a true example of what's possible with the JPEG versus the RAW. You can see
this area especially by the left side is a lot better in the RAW photo compared
to the JPEG. That's just blotchy mess kind of. Lots of blocks of color and it
just looks terrible. But with the RAW, again it has the color noise but it still
has some detail to it which is good. So here's the photo compressed down to small
view. In this case probably not a huge difference. There's some slight
coloration differences that's more green I think and... But basically pretty similar.
So this one here is shot at a higher ISO. That's the highest ISO I took at that
specific outing with the phone. But you could see a pretty large difference. The
colors are different. There's a lot more blotchiness to the JPEG. Even the
texturing.. you can see on the edges of that little stick coming out that it's
pretty blotchy and weird looking on the JPEG file. Somewhat similar when you
compress it down. So even at that higher ISO... If
you don't care about larger sizes then JPEGs probably alright. That was a quick
practical look at a few photos from different cameras with the RAW and the
JPEG files. I think in the case of smaller sensors having the option for
RAW is really important, and it gives you a lot more ability to get the best
possible out of that small sensor. But the funny thing is is that a lot of
smaller cameras don't give you that option. So maybe in the future camera
companies will get that idea that RAW really needs to be in a lot of cameras.
Be in every camera to give photographers the best possible results they can get
when they want to spend more time. Of course you can adjust things in the
camera to potentially improve the JPEG processing. Some cameras are better than
others, but I personally prefer to shoot RAW most of the time. Now, I will do the
RAW + JPEG especially in cases like this, but even so I tend to not use JPEG
that much because I don't really care about the size of RAWs. Processing can
sometimes be an issue especially with new cameras. Even with the M50 the CR3
format is barely supported. Adobe, Capture One now and a few other programs maybe...
Of course, Canon's official software. But there are definitely positives to each
side. If you don't really care about a little bit more processing time. A
little bit more battery use with the RAW + JPEG, I'd say go for that. But
otherwise I think RAW is always a good option when you can do that. I hope you
enjoyed this video I'm Scott from Photography Banzai. If you did enjoy the video...
Please consider subscribing, that helps me out a lot.
Likes and shares help out a lot as well.
Thanks again!