With all DSLRs and most serious point-and-shoot cameras now offering a RAW file format, there’s no reason why any serious photographer should regularly shoot in JPG. RAW is the complete set of data captured by the camera’s sensor, whereas JPG is the result after the camera has interpreted that data and decided which of the data is important to keep (and which can be discarded).
Will one always get a better picture from a RAW file? Not necessarily. In good lighting conditions (bright, consistently-lit scene) with a properly exposed photo, a JPG may provide adequate results. If the lighting is less than ideal or the scene represents a wide dynamic range, the RAW file will ensure the maximum possible amount of data available for post-processing.
Disk space is cheap… with terabyte drives now under $100, storage space is a poor excuse for avoiding RAW. Software can convert RAW files to other formats quickly, so if one doesn’t want to spend time with custom processing, he doesn’t need to.
At this point of the digital imaging evolution, there’s no excuse for not shooting RAW.
I’ve had around 30 photos featured in Flickr’s Explore section, which showcases the most interesting 500 photos submitted each day. When one browses Explore, there are some obvious patterns, topics, and even colors which seem to come up frequently. Certain types of photos do well.
One of my more popular images is Under Dolores, a photo taken while looking through a culvert/walkway underneath a railroad yard in Los Angeles. The Flickr-ed image is a departure from the out-of-the-camera shot and I thought it might be interesting to take a quick look at the process:
First, as from the camera:
After adjusting the exposure:
Finally, applying tone and contrast adjustments:
Was the image altered? Heck yes. Did I alter the image specifically to give it more pop and make it an eye-catcher? Yes.
Is that wrong? There’s the debate. Personally I have no problem with folks who adjust images to create something new. I’m not trying to pass it off as some accurate representation of reality, but rather as a piece of art. Most of my photos aren’t altered this heavily, but this one seems to lead to a lot of conversations, so I thought I’d post a bit about how it got to the final state.
As someone who lives in a single-story house and works on the third floor of a 6-story building, a little elevation is a nice change in perspective at times.
Looking north towards the Old Town area of Portland from the 21st floor of the US Bancorp Tower.
If you’re used to being near the earth, I recommend you try elevating your stature once in a while 
I’m actively trying to expand my photography skills and portfolio of “people” shots. In the past, I’ve tended to do “grab shots” of people, without much thought to lighting or composition and without much post-processing work. As I focus more on the people, I’m being more conscious of these factors, and thus far I’m pleased with the results.
click for Flickr viewThis was shot on Friday at the Green Dragon in Portland. Interesting lighting, attention to composition, and conscious post-processing work to bring out the lighting results in something pleasing.
I suffered a hard drive failure yesterday. I’ve been meaning to write a long post explaining my storage and backup methods, and I suppose this would be a great time to do so, since my methods were put to the test (and passed). My system isn’t overly complicated, and probably could be enhanced, but here it is:
Primary Storage: Internal Hard Drive
My primary photo storage is on the internal hard drive of my PC. This is where images are transferred from the card reader, this is where they are cataloged, and this is where I make all edits.
First Backup: External Hard Drive
My first backup location is an external hard drive. The external drive is a copy of the photos stored on my PC. When I download images from the card reader, I also make a copy to the external hard drive.
Secondary Backup: Offsite DVDs
My secondary backup method is burning DVDs which are then stored offsite. This is the “last resort” backup, intended for use if something were to happen to my home (fire, major theft, etc). I burn DVDs after photos have been processed and cataloged, and store the DVDs in a relatively secure offsite location.
Yesterday I got back into town from vacation. As I was preparing to shoot a wedding last night, I noticed my external hard drive wasn’t available and the lights were dark. Further troubleshooting indicated a drive failure. I’d purchased the drive about two months ago at Costco. I probably could’ve gotten it a few dollars cheaper online, but one of the reasons I shop at Costco is their awesome returns/exchange policy. Today I drove to Costco, told them what happened, and they promptly gave me a refund for the full price of the drive. I picked up a new drive and was on my way in about 10 minutes.
My files? They’re now happily copied over to the new backup drive. With my backup system of two copies onsite and one copy offsite, a single drive failure will never mean data loss.
