A.Hard Light(no fill) B.Soft Light (no fill)
C.Hard light (with fill) D. Soft Light(with fill)
C.Hard light (with fill) D. Soft Light(with fill)
A.Hard Light(no fill) B.Soft Light (no fill) C.Hard light (with fill) D. Soft Light(with fill) A B C D1..Side Light2..Rembrant Lighting 3.Butterfly lighting
0 Comments
***Hover over images to see if you can guess what type of color theory it displays!!! :D
1.Select Image.Show unprocessed raw vs. processed raw2.Processed raw and jpeg in photoshop3.Comparison of file size, image quality, highlight/shadow dataFile Size- At the end of the day, the JPEG image is ALOOOT smaller in file size compared to the raw image: by at least a couple thouse kb's! Image Quality(shadows and highlights)- If you just glance at the images above, you can immidiately see a HUGE difference in image quality between a RAW and JPEG. When i edited the jpeg, there was only so much i could do to it, for the camera had already combined the highlights in the image into 1. However, when it came to processing the raw, the possibilities seemed endless! I could edit every tone in the picture and actually replicate the beauty i saw in person! [if not make it a tad bot better] :) 4.My observationsWhile interacting with the Jpeg and raw photography settings, i believe that a raw allows for a more pure image before and a highly editable image after processing. With raw photos, you control your picture, not the software deciding what 'looks better'. During processing, i literally control every pixel and edit it the way i feel looks best. When finished, you can see every tone, highlight, and shadow down to the pixel level! I was truly amazed by these results of raw. The main down fall, however, is the obvious file size difference, but i believe that is only a small price to pay for an image of that great of quality.
What is a RAW image?
Why Shoot RAW photos?
Read more: http://digital-photography-school.com/raw-vs-jpeg#ixzz2e301uA58 |