The DSLR Camera/Car Combo Thread!!

[Red.]

Originally Posted by insane_one

Is it better to shoot in JPEG or RAW?
Does editing make RAW photos look sharper?
Should i just shoot in JPEG if i dont plan to edit?

JPEG files have already been edited by your camera. So, yes, they appear sharper, more vibrant, etc right out of the camera. The camera has already made decisions about what its programmers think your photo should look like.

RAW files are simply a lump of data (big lump, usually) that the camera has made no/minimal decisions about. It has collected a bunch of information based on the settings you have given it (aperture, ISO, shutter speed, etc). RAW files leave it up to you to adjust sharpness, contrast, saturation, or whatever else you would like to change/adjust in your photo. RAW files give you a lot more flexibility in the PP stage.

Neither format is inherently better, they are just different. They have different uses, different pros and cons. If you know you won't be doing much editing after the fact, then jpgs might be just fine for you. Particularly if you're in a hurry for whatever reason. If you plan to do a lot of PP or are working in crummy shooting conditions or whatnot, then RAW might be for you.

I like having a lot of data to work with, so I shoot in RAW. But that's just my preference.

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

[Red.]

I was having a good morning until I opened up Flickr.
So far, New Flickr is
Just not digging the changes.

[Mr. Lin]

yeah, it takes some getting used to. they did the changes as i was using it. i was using the old version, trying to copy and paste image links and then BOOM, change...

[Red.]

Is the "more ways to share" button now where you find the links to share images on here? And, if so, is it working for you? I tried clicking on it and it doesn't do anything?

[Mr. Lin]

I do it the same way I always did before. click ur pic, right click for the sizes, click the size u want, wait for it to load, right click + copy image link or whatever it is... wash, rinse and repeat.

edit: however, upon further inspection, the share button does have the html or bb coding for each size.

[Red.]

Clicking on my photos doesn't actually do anything. I don't get any other size options and right clicking is almost as unproductive as regular clicking. Clicking on the share button also does nothing.

[Mr. Lin]

hrmmm. what kind of computer are you using? have you tried restarting your browser and computer? I wouldn't think flickr would be updated without keeping every platform in mind.

[INKMAN]

Originally Posted by Red.

I was having a good morning until I opened up Flickr.
So far, New Flickr is
Just not digging the changes.

The new interface looks great but it is WAY different. I needed some warning for that! I miss not being able to see how many views each photo has and being able to see the EXIF info easily.

[Mr. Lin]

Originally Posted by INKMAN

The new interface looks great but it is WAY different. I needed some warning for that! I miss not being able to see how many views each photo has and being able to see the EXIF info easily.

yeah i'm still trying to figure out how to see views.

[INKMAN]

Click on the photo then scroll down. It's on the right hand side.

[VampireHunterD]

I don't have an account with Flickr, but I use 500px

[insane_one]

Originally Posted by Red.

JPEG files have already been edited by your camera. So, yes, they appear sharper, more vibrant, etc right out of the camera. The camera has already made decisions about what its programmers think your photo should look like.

RAW files are simply a lump of data (big lump, usually) that the camera has made no/minimal decisions about. It has collected a bunch of information based on the settings you have given it (aperture, ISO, shutter speed, etc). RAW files leave it up to you to adjust sharpness, contrast, saturation, or whatever else you would like to change/adjust in your photo. RAW files give you a lot more flexibility in the PP stage.

Neither format is inherently better, they are just different. They have different uses, different pros and cons. If you know you won't be doing much editing after the fact, then jpgs might be just fine for you. Particularly if you're in a hurry for whatever reason. If you plan to do a lot of PP or are working in crummy shooting conditions or whatnot, then RAW might be for you.

I like having a lot of data to work with, so I shoot in RAW. But that's just my preference.

Thank you!

[Red.]

I'm not wild about the new layout - it is part of why I never switched over to 500px, despite pushing from some friends - b/c it just feels cumbersome and unwieldy. And I liked being able to share my photos in groups and pools. Now I can't seem to do that. I could get used to the new layout if that was the only problem. But, part of why I upload my photos is to be able to share them and if the service can't do that for me, then what good is it and why do I pay for it? I hope it is just a glitch and will sort itself out, but coming down the pipes is a Flickr experience covered in ads. And whatever BS Marissa Mayer wants to tell us about it being all about the photos, once you throw ads onto the page, that'll be the end of that.

I'll most likely continue with Flickr for a little while simply b/c of how connected it is with other sites, such as this one. But, eventually migrate all my content elsewhere. I'll give it at least until the ads show up and we'll see how things are at that time.

I use a Mac with OSX10.6. Not the newest OSX, but shouldn't be outdated enough yet to be incompatible with the new updates to Flickr.

[INKMAN]

I eventually want to have my own website once I feel my work deserves one. I also like the group pools and being a part of them. I don't see a huge issue to make a change at this point.

[Sirricealot]

I dig the new Flickr change.

Big dishies by Evoked Photography, on Flickr

[VampireHunterD]

Mixed lighting with my speed light

[Mr. Lin]

Originally Posted by Red.

I use a Mac with OSX10.6. Not the newest OSX, but shouldn't be outdated enough yet to be incompatible with the new updates to Flickr.

I'm using the same os. Are you using Safari or Firefox? I've been on Firefox and haven't touched Safari in ages.

[_adam]

[Red.]

Originally Posted by Mr. Lin

I'm using the same os. Are you using Safari or Firefox? I've been on Firefox and haven't touched Safari in ages.

I'm using Safari. The unclickabilty glitch randomly sorted itself out this afternoon. So, at least that's one annoyance overcome.

Still don't like the wall-to-wall photos look, the always-in-lightbox viewing of individual photos, and still dislike the homescreen/page. Doesn't seem to be anything I can do about any of that though.

Viewing photos a little bigger than they were would have been nice, I just don't like them huge and smooshed together.