What is the difference between RAW and JPEG in digital camera terms?

Question

What is the difference between RAW and JPEG in digital camera terms?

Answer 1

In digital camera terms, RAW is simply the raw information on the sensor--just a bunch of 1's and 0's. A jpeg is inherently a photographic file.



Or, put another way, RAW is simply film that has been exposed but not developed. Jpeg is film that has been developed in a set, standard way to make an image.



Because RAW has to be "processed" to make an image, it gives you more control over how the image ultimately comes out, because you can adjust things like color, contrast, saturation, sharpness, etc. With jpeg, because it's already undergone the fixed "development", it's much more limited with what you can do to adjust the image. This is because jpeg is "lossy," that is, it throws away data that it doesn't think is needed.



Example: Suppose you shoot in daylight but have the white balance set to indoor shooting. Your photos will come out blue. With RAW, no problem to fix, because you have the original data and you just change the white balance when processing the RAW file to make an image. By comparison, with jpeg, if the white balance is that far off, there's no way to fix it because the data to make the colors right has been thrown away during the process of creating the jpeg.



Thus, if you can always get it right, jpeg is fine. But if you want the maximum flexibility and quality and don't mind doing some computer work after taking the photo, RAW will give you more latitude.



Essentially, you can also think of it this way: your camera always shoots RAW. But if you have it set to jpeg, the camera will take that RAW file, process it in the camera, and save a jpeg to your memory card, discarding the RAW (usually, unless you save that too). If you have it set to RAW capture, then the camera saves the RAW and you do the work that the camera would be doing (converting it to a jpeg). The advantage of that is that you get control over the conversion factors to your liking, not the camera's internal choices.

Answer 2

raw is a propriatory format for each camera maker.. it contians much mor einformation than JPEG, theoiretically its the data as read from the inamge sensor



JPEG is a mechanism for encoding (compressing) that date so it takes up less space. in JPEG you can alter the comprression rations (its usually called quality or soemthign similar). JPEG works back averaging the colour and luminance of a block / area, the lower the quality the larger that sample size is, the more pixillated / blocky the image looks.. Teh real problem is that by storign images on the camera as a JPEG you are immediately throwing away information, the more so if you use a basic setting, rather than quality or high quality.



The big difference is that when you edit a JPEG to reduce the file size you are throwing away inforamtion that can never ever be recovered (unless you go back to the original image) But it salo is a standard format whioch means there are a large range of software and devices that can easily read JPEG's that may not be able to read a specific camera makers RAW format.



RAW format is easier to edit and manipulate post image without sacrificing infroamtion. In a RAW file normally the 3/4 colours are stored along with luminance for each pixel on the image sensor so that you can be a lot more selective about post processign at home.



as an earlier poster has sadi the practical difference for the average camera user is minimal.. unless you want to start doing fancy post porcessign trick in photshop and the like, where RAW format is much easier and more reliable that JPEG.

Answer 3

The RAW data is just that, the RAW data, direct from the sensor. This contains ALL the information the sensor recorded which is what makes the RAW format so useful.



You can change the settings applied to the RAW data in Photoshop (so affecting how it will appear) by saving the settings in the RAW converter.



These settings are carried in a 'sidecar' (Xmp file) which can be either attached to each individual image or global if you chose a centralised cache in the Bridge Preferences.



Either way they do NOT alter the RAW data, only the way the Raw data is viewed, similar to the way an adjustment layer would work. In other words the Xmp file is like a filter through which the data is viewed. This Xmp file is what is written to by Photoshop when you alter the Exposure, Colour Balance, Contrast, Gamma etc.. The original RAW file is NEVER written to, so is always available in it's original form.



When you open the image in Photoshop it makes a COPY of the original RAW data with the Xmp file applied, for further manipulation with adjustment layers, filters etc..



Obviously all this manipulation could 'dump' some of the original data in this copied file, so Photoshop introduced Smart Objects, what they do is refer back to the original RAW data and restores 'dumped' data if further manipulation requires it, so you will always be working with the maximum data available.



I hope this shows just how powerful shooting in RAW is.



Jpeg on the other hand is only an 8 bit file, Raw is 12 bit. Everytime you add a bit from 8 to 12 you double the information available, so doubling it 4 times increases the data enormously, when shooting as a Jpeg the camera makes the best image it can from the 12 bit Raw data then 'dumps' the rest (which is most of the data recorded). Shooting in Raw means you keep all the data, but you have to do the conversion into a 'presentable' picture. The big advantage being you still have ALL your options open for Exposure, Colour Balance, Saturation, Sharpening etc.. It put you back in charge of your picture.



You won't see any difference on your monitor because it's only an 8 bit device and can only show part of the information.



Chris

Answer 4

A RAW file is exactly that - all the digital information at the time of the shot is preserved in the file. This is the equivalent of a digital "negative". You can then open the file using a program capable of reading it, usually Adobe Photoshop or Adobe Bridge, and you decide how you want to manpulate the shot, e.g the size, the resolution, White Balance, the "temperature" etc.

JPEG (Joint Photographers Experts' Group) is a compression file format developed so that Continuous Tone (i.e. photos) images could be shared across the internet. It is different from RAW in that when a JPEG is saved, data is sacrified to make the compression. This data is lost for ever: in JPEG the file you save and the file you open are not the same.

That's the reason why with a RAW file, despite the file size, you can get exactly what you shot; but JPEG often looks "blocky" or blurred.

Answer 5

Raw Files Vs Jpeg

Answer 6

RAW is a capture of digital data with little or no processing done by the camera.



In a JPEG capture the camera makes decisions about what the photo should like, processes it, and saves it.



In terms of size, in my camera, the RAW file size is about three times larger than the JPEG file.

Answer 7

The difference between the two formats is basally that JPE|G is downloaded as a picture file and can be viewed straight away, every time you load it how ever you will lose very slight definition, it is far better to convert JPEG files to TIFF they retain definition a lot better.



Raw files are downloaded from the camera to the computer as a data file, this means that you can manipulate the picture far far more as in essence it is data until you produce the picture on your computer. In this mode you can do far more with the picture such as highlighting various areas and ans altering colour depth easily because you are altering data and then you are able to compose your picture.

Answer 8

JPEG is a lossy compressed format and relies on the cameras on board computer for the image processing and compression.



RAW is the complete unprocessed image data and the final colour and exposure settings are done on your computer, with your choice of software.



RAW is for your best work and JPEG is good when memory card space is an important factor.



http://digital-photography.suite101.com/article.cfm/photographic_formats_raw_v_jpeg

Answer 9

RAW is the unproccessed image as your camera sensor picks the image up, then you require software to "develop" the RAW (i use Adobe Lightroom) and the JPEG is the file format that is processed by the camera's software. It is a standard format and doesn't require any software other than an image viewer really to print off.

Answer 10

RAW is unprocessed and JPEG has been processed either by a camera or software.

the best way to look at it is to think of RAW as the ingredients and the JPEG, BMPs etc isthe meal!

Answer 11

both are formats for saving/viewing/editing digital images



for the average user, JPEG is the only format you need to be concerned with



RAW: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAW_image_format



JPEG: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jpeg



this link goes into great detail: http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/raw-vs-jpeg/

Answer 12

From photography and DSLR camera basics right through to advanced techniques used by the professionals, this course will quickly and easily get your photography skills focused! Go here https://tr.im/pUCJh

By the end of this course you will have developed an instinctive skill-for-life that will enable you to capture truly stunning photos that not only amaze your friends and family... but could also open the doors to a brand new career.

Answer 13

RAW has more information saved and is much larger file and depending on the use is better for editing. You wouldnt be able to take raw files to the store to get printed though so you would need to software to edit and then covert to a differnt type of file.

Answer 14

1

Answer 15

If you shoot hundreds or thousands of images in a day shoot JPG and don't worry. The quality is the same for almost all intents and purposes as raw, and the raw files would take gigabytes or tens of gigabytes and resultant hours to download, convert, catalog and burn to backup CDs. In fact, if you shoot this much then JPG can give better quality since attempting to shoot this much raw will constipate your workflow and you could miss making some images entirely as your cards fill up. You'd always be running out of memory cards or time waiting for the acess light to stop blinking.

JPG Basics

JPGs (same as JPEGs) are normal digital camera images. Cameras create JPG images from raw image sensor data based on your settings like Sharpness and White Balance. The camera makes the JPG and then the raw data evaporates as soon as the JPG is recorded.

Beware JPEG 2000 which you only find in some advanced software. It was a newer proposed version of JPG that has been forgotten today for still photography. It is COMPLETELY INCOMPATIBLE WITH the current JPG systems. JPEG 2000 has found application in the Digital Cinema Initiative and will be used as their standard for the movies many or most of us will be seeing in theaters today and in the near future.

More Details of Joint photographic expect group (JPEG) go to : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jpeg



If you love to tweak your images one-by one and shoot less than about a hundred shots at a time than raw could be for you. In fact, if you prefer the look you can get from raw (it may be different from JPG in some cases depending on software) you can let your computer batch process images and save the results as JPGs, too. I almost never shoot anything in raw, and when I do I never see any difference for all the effort I wasted anyway. (I can see differences if I blow things up to 100% or bigger on my computer, but not in prints.)

Raw Basics

Raw files are just the raw sensor data. It isn't a picture until it is processed further. Most fancy digital cameras allow you to save the raw data instead of the actual JPG picture. If you do, you still have to do the processing in your computer to make an image (JPG or otherwise) that you actually can see. Cameras do this processing in hardware much faster than your computer can do it in software.

Some cameras have a handy raw + JPG mode which saves both the raw data and the JPG picture.

Raw files are just like raw olives: you need to cook or otherwise process them before you can use them. They also go bad fast if left in the raw state and can keep forever once processed to something like olive oil or JPGs.

Horror of horrors, I've heard that the latest Nikon software can't even read the NEFs from older cameras and that you need to load older software to read them. Just like raw eggs, unless you process it into something like an egg-albumen print or a JPG, the raw files may go bad if left unprocessed.

It's not the file that goes bad, silly, it's the potential ability of future software to read it. Since raw data is entirely unique to each camera, and different even for different firmware revisions for the same camera, raw isn't even a format, even though the different files have the same suffix like .CRW or .NEF.

Raw files themselves don't go bad. What goes bad is the possibility that in 10 or 20 years that whatever software we're running on whatever sort of computer we have 20 years from today will be able to open a long-forgotten 20-year old proprietary file.

JPGs are universal. Raw is proprietary to camera make and model and even camera firmware version. Without solid manufacturer support you won't be able to use your raw files again.

Can you find a computer to open word processing files from 10 or 20 years ago today in Lotus Notes or PFS Write or Brother Style Writer? I can't; that's why I converted my files from these programs to the universal .TXT format back when I could. Do you trust Canon, Nikon and Adobe to support 10 or 20 year old cameras? How about 30 or 40 year old cameras? If you do, go ahead and leave your raw files as raw. I convert all my raw files to JPGs or TIFFs for archiving.

The JPG processing in the camera can be better than what you may be able to do later in software from raw. In the September 2004 issue of "Outdoor Photographer" magazine, page 25, Rob Shepard says "...the high quality JPEG images looked far superior to the raw files when both were opened directly."

Cameras create their JPGs from the 12 bit or more raw data as it comes off the sensor. Your contrast, white balance, sharpening and everything are applied to the raw data in-camera, and only afterwards is the file compressed and stored as a JPG. You'll see no additional artifacts since that's all done before the JPG conversion.

Using raw files obviously takes a lot more time and patience, like refrying beans, since you could have had all that processing done right in the camera for free. You only want to go through this trouble if for some reason you're unsure of what settings to use. The raw data, since it includes everything, also takes up a whole lot more space and takes more time to move around. It's sort of like either having a complete car that runs (JPG), or a science project in a million pieces that still needs assembly before you can drive it (raw). You can't really change exposure after a raw file is shot, although the software that opens this data gives one the option to rescale the data and give the impression of changing exposure. You can get this same synthetic lightening from JPGs, too, although only raw allows some ability to correct overexposure.

I take a lot of flack from tweakers because I, like other photographers, prefer to make my adjustments in-camera and use the JPGs directly. Others prefer to spend even more time later twiddling in raw, but that's not for me. I get the look I need with JPGs and prefer to spend my time making more photos. If you're the sort of person who likes to twiddle and redo than by all means raw is for you.

Everyone's needs vary. For many hobbyists tweaking is part of the fun and I don't want to spoil that. Please just don't take it personally that I prefer to get my shots right the first time instead of having to tweak them later. If I need to correct a goof I just do it from the JPGs.



More Details : JPEG: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jpeg