What pixel size to you shoot with and why? My Canon Rebel XS can shoot 10.1 Megapixel RAW files and 10.1, 5.3 and 2.5 Megapixel jpgs. I tend to mostly use RAW, but I am thinking about using medium quality (5.3 MP) jpgs for every day shots. I would shot RAW for pictures that I would turn into 9x12 posters or other photos that I would like to do more editing. My manual lists A3 (16.5x11.7in) paper size for the 10.1 MP jps and RAW files and A4 (11.7x8.3in) paper for medium quality jps (5.3 MP). I have not seen a noticeable quality difference in the pictures on my screen and I print mostly 4x6 or 8x10. If you are a professional or trained photographer, could you please explain why you use the pixel size that you use. One more piece of information, the 10.1MP size is 3888x2592 @ 72 dpi and the 5.3 mp size is 2816x1880 @72 dpi. when I edit my photos I resize them to 6"x4" (1800x1200) @300 dpi.
Although I'm not a professional photographer (but working in the graphic design and print industry taught me this) I always shoot in RAW and at the highest resolution available for two reasons - firstly, RAW offers significant benefits in editing capability, and secondly, you can easily reproduce a shot smaller than shot, but can't upsize without interpolation which can often have less than satisfactory results depending on the shot and the increase ratio.
Another reason for using a RAW rather than jpg workflow is that jpg compression introduces artefacts - although this is rarely an issue unless you are heavily compressing a file or re-compressing it many times.
Out of curiosity, is there a reason why you resize when you edit? It may be that for your own workflow and uses, shooting in jpg is the most efficient way, but it has limitations.
With storage capacity so cheap these days I personally wouldn't shoot anything but RAW, I would always be forgetting to reset back to RAW settings and taking a critical shot at a lower resolution without intending to. I would also find shooting in multiple formats means having separate workflows for each format. But that's me - what works for me and my needs may not work for you.
@microart I resize my edits to make smaller files for uploading. A RAW file is 54" x 36" at 10.1MP and 72dpi. Is this a typical file size and how would you resize your files to be uploaded to the web?
I shoot usually in 18 MP. I will occasionally shoot RAW if I know I'm going to be using b&w but for the most part I stay in 18MP jpeg. With this resolution there's not much need to shoot RAW for everything...not to mention the enormous size of RAW files can quickly fill up my memory space.
i only shoot in raw because raw gives me the kind of power i use to have in the darkroom as far as choices regarding the final image. and i can change that image over and over again-- yes the files are bigger but that's a small price to pay for power! however, i do print my shots and print them large - 13x19 sometimes larger. i think even if i was just taking candid pictures of friends i'd still want raw never know when some gem might appear that had i chosen raw i could have gotten more out of the image... for me it's that i don't like my camera making so many of the choices for me which is what jpg feels like it is doing...
You really only should be shooting in two modes, RAW + L or Ljpeg. Its really already been stated why RAW is better then normal JPEG but the 'to long didn't read' version is that its easier to edit and you have more control.
Remember, when everything is all said and done you can easily reduce the size of the photos, but you should never upsize.
Like in sports, it's easier to run forward then it is to run backwords.
I always use RAW + large jpeg for the same reason as @andrew_pavlik . I also set jpeg to B&W in some cases when I want to do B&W, and if I don't like it I always have to option to go back to color using RAW.
@viranod@andrew_pavlik@cfrantz I have only had my camera since Christmas so I am learning every day. I had a period of about 4 weeks that I only shot RAW. I am experimenting with different setting and am asking many questions about the best way to use my DSLR. Thank you for your inputs and I may start shooting only RAW in the future. How do you guys resize for uploads to this site?
I normally don't resize because I want to keep photos here as backup also. But after hearing about some misuse of photos I will likely do soon. I use Apple Aperture, and the function export as...(type/size) is very easy to use.
Not a professional photographer but am a professional nerd.
Can only see one hypothetical reason for shooting at below-maximum resolution - there might be potential for less noise to creep in (at the cost of less detail, of course), if more pixels in the sensor are involved in creating each resulting pixel of colour/light in the image. I say "might" because I've no idea if DSLR sensors work this way, and in any event if you're downsizing them to 8x10 there'll probably be no difference anyway - so my advice is to shoot as high a resolution as you can, for maximum flexibility.
Disk space is cheap these days anyway, so don't worry about filesizes - I picked up a 1TB external drive the other day for ~$120 (£95), which at my heady resolution of 18MP is good for about 40,000 photos, so perhaps double this number at 10MP.
Echoing everyone else on the RAW/JPG front, there's really no need to ever use jpg once you're comfortable with RAW's workflow requirements. I doubt PSP's too good with them so ideally you'd need something like Adobe Lightroom to make the most of RAW images. Or to start with, whatever RAW-capable software came with the camera.
@eyebrows I am using Canon Digital Photo Professional that came with my camera to process my RAW files. I purchased a 1TB external drive last year and us it to store my photos. The part that scared me the most is how to backup the 1TB drive.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Another reason for using a RAW rather than jpg workflow is that jpg compression introduces artefacts - although this is rarely an issue unless you are heavily compressing a file or re-compressing it many times.
Out of curiosity, is there a reason why you resize when you edit? It may be that for your own workflow and uses, shooting in jpg is the most efficient way, but it has limitations.
With storage capacity so cheap these days I personally wouldn't shoot anything but RAW, I would always be forgetting to reset back to RAW settings and taking a critical shot at a lower resolution without intending to. I would also find shooting in multiple formats means having separate workflows for each format. But that's me - what works for me and my needs may not work for you.
Remember, when everything is all said and done you can easily reduce the size of the photos, but you should never upsize.
Like in sports, it's easier to run forward then it is to run backwords.
Can only see one hypothetical reason for shooting at below-maximum resolution - there might be potential for less noise to creep in (at the cost of less detail, of course), if more pixels in the sensor are involved in creating each resulting pixel of colour/light in the image. I say "might" because I've no idea if DSLR sensors work this way, and in any event if you're downsizing them to 8x10 there'll probably be no difference anyway - so my advice is to shoot as high a resolution as you can, for maximum flexibility.
Disk space is cheap these days anyway, so don't worry about filesizes - I picked up a 1TB external drive the other day for ~$120 (£95), which at my heady resolution of 18MP is good for about 40,000 photos, so perhaps double this number at 10MP.
Echoing everyone else on the RAW/JPG front, there's really no need to ever use jpg once you're comfortable with RAW's workflow requirements. I doubt PSP's too good with them so ideally you'd need something like Adobe Lightroom to make the most of RAW images. Or to start with, whatever RAW-capable software came with the camera.