Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 21, 2012, 11:33 PM   #1
theuserjohnny
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
RAW or JPEG for timelapse photography?

For those who do TL do you guys prefer to shoot in RAW or JPEG?

I want to keep the RAW files so that I can correct exposures and such but I'm limited to the number of shots I get. I'm considering of just bumping down to S-RAW2.

Currently I'm not doing anything huge. I'm just doing a TL of Disneyland and I have a pass to the park and I go often so I don't mind having just roughly 600 shots (8GB card, going to get a 16GB soon).

But I just wanted to get some opinions on others who do TL.

Should I keep the quality control of having RAW files or should I aim for capacity in JPEG?
__________________
2013 13' Macbook Air, 1.3GHz, 4GBRAM, 256GBSSD
2012 15" rMBP, 2.7GHz, 16GBRAM, 768GBSSD
2006 13" Macbook (white), 2.16GHz, 3GBRAM, 120GBHD
Google Nexus 4 16GB
theuserjohnny is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 12:10 AM   #2
wonderspark
macrumors 68030
 
wonderspark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denver, CO
I think it depends on how much time and storage you have to work with. If I was doing only 600 images in tricky lighting, I'd shoot RAW, but if you don't have the space or time to process, the decision will be made for you.

My last time lapse was a little over 112,000 images, and I shot them JPG to keep it simple. If you expose them right, you won't have to worry about correction, and it saves time with batch processing. When I do day-to-night or vice versa (sunrise, sunset) transitions, RAW is a lot more useful, but I think Disneyland images will be easy to expose correctly. Here's another older one (only about 70,000 images) that were also shot JPG, just to show it can be done and look good. In both examples, I ended up throwing away many thousands of frames to cut out the "boring" parts where they were just digging holes and letting concrete dry, haha.

128GB Class 10 SDXC cards are pretty cheap these days, and I use a pair of them to keep the camera going for long periods of time without having to move it.
__________________
Wait a second... So you're telling me anything that happens in the sky is legal, and there's a giant crime-blimp flying around this place? I don't know how I missed that.
wonderspark is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 01:08 AM   #3
Caliber26
macrumors 65816
 
Caliber26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by theuserjohnny View Post
For those who do TL do you guys prefer to shoot in RAW or JPEG?

I want to keep the RAW files so that I can correct exposures and such but I'm limited to the number of shots I get. I'm considering of just bumping down to S-RAW2.

Currently I'm not doing anything huge. I'm just doing a TL of Disneyland and I have a pass to the park and I go often so I don't mind having just roughly 600 shots (8GB card, going to get a 16GB soon).

But I just wanted to get some opinions on others who do TL.

Should I keep the quality control of having RAW files or should I aim for capacity in JPEG?
Just out of curiosity, what are you shooting a TL of at DLR? I work at WDW so I'm wondering if a new big attraction is being developed?

BTW, I never knew TL were shot with stills. I always assumed it was continuous video played at a very high speed.
Caliber26 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 01:58 AM   #4
wonderspark
macrumors 68030
 
wonderspark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Video with speed adjustment is another way of doing it, but it's a lot more efficient to shoot stills as needed instead of throwing away so many frames of video by speeding it up. Not only that, but if you shoot stills, you benefit from the vastly greater resolution of the still images over mere 1920x1080.

I used to work at Disneyland, way back. It's a whole new park, now! Anyway, I was under the impression he was just shooting for fun, not necessarily construction of a new attraction.
__________________
Wait a second... So you're telling me anything that happens in the sky is legal, and there's a giant crime-blimp flying around this place? I don't know how I missed that.
wonderspark is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 07:55 PM   #5
theuserjohnny
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caliber26 View Post
Just out of curiosity, what are you shooting a TL of at DLR? I work at WDW so I'm wondering if a new big attraction is being developed?

BTW, I never knew TL were shot with stills. I always assumed it was continuous video played at a very high speed.
I'm just shooting for fun! Nothing serious just gives me something to work on while at the park because there are some days where the parks are just packed and I end up riding like 1 ride and then leaving because I'm annoyed. At least with this I can do something at the park.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderspark View Post
I think it depends on how much time and storage you have to work with. If I was doing only 600 images in tricky lighting, I'd shoot RAW, but if you don't have the space or time to process, the decision will be made for you.

My last time lapse was a little over 112,000 images, and I shot them JPG to keep it simple. If you expose them right, you won't have to worry about correction, and it saves time with batch processing. When I do day-to-night or vice versa (sunrise, sunset) transitions, RAW is a lot more useful, but I think Disneyland images will be easy to expose correctly. Here's another older one (only about 70,000 images) that were also shot JPG, just to show it can be done and look good. In both examples, I ended up throwing away many thousands of frames to cut out the "boring" parts where they were just digging holes and letting concrete dry, haha.

128GB Class 10 SDXC cards are pretty cheap these days, and I use a pair of them to keep the camera going for long periods of time without having to move it.
They make 128GB CF cards? I'm shooting with a Mark II I think I'm going to upgrade to a Mark III so that I can do CF and SD and that should increase my capacity big time.

Right now I did a test on Thunder Mt since the ride is closing for the year sometime in early January and wanted to at least get some sort of timelapse footage for it.

My plan is to intercut timelapse with actual footage (hopefully I can get a Mark III or just barrow someone's camera for slowmotion w/ 60fps right now I just have the GoPro for slowmotion). I think that it can be something special if I just take my time... I'm aiming for a end of 2013 release maybe sooner.
__________________
2013 13' Macbook Air, 1.3GHz, 4GBRAM, 256GBSSD
2012 15" rMBP, 2.7GHz, 16GBRAM, 768GBSSD
2006 13" Macbook (white), 2.16GHz, 3GBRAM, 120GBHD
Google Nexus 4 16GB
theuserjohnny is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 09:14 PM   #6
Prodo123
macrumors 68020
 
Prodo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderspark View Post
Video with speed adjustment is another way of doing it, but it's a lot more efficient to shoot stills as needed instead of throwing away so many frames of video by speeding it up. Not only that, but if you shoot stills, you benefit from the vastly greater resolution of the still images over mere 1920x1080.

I used to work at Disneyland, way back. It's a whole new park, now! Anyway, I was under the impression he was just shooting for fun, not necessarily construction of a new attraction.
I would not recommend this, as storage becomes an issue with longer shoots.

I shoot RAW with time lapse as long as the storage allows for it. In post, it has the color depth which comes in handy when making stacked images. If it's an extended period lasting 3000+ shots then of course I use JPEG, but at full resolution so I have the ability to crop the time lapse video to whatever size I want.
__________________
MacBook Pro 15" 2.2Ghz hi-res glossy, 16GB RAM, Logitech G700, Das Keyboard, Seagate Momentus XT 750GB iPhone 5 White 32GB Audiophile Photographer, videographer, audio engineer
Prodo123 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 09:39 PM   #7
wonderspark
macrumors 68030
 
wonderspark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prodo123 View Post
I would not recommend this, as storage becomes an issue with longer shoots.

I shoot RAW with time lapse as long as the storage allows for it. In post, it has the color depth which comes in handy when making stacked images. If it's an extended period lasting 3000+ shots then of course I use JPEG, but at full resolution so I have the ability to crop the time lapse video to whatever size I want.
Exactly.
__________________
Wait a second... So you're telling me anything that happens in the sky is legal, and there's a giant crime-blimp flying around this place? I don't know how I missed that.
wonderspark is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2014, 06:24 PM   #8
ferrarofilms
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Number of shots. How is your camera doing?

I specifically asked Canon: how many shots a camera is designed for?, thinking on the mirror going up and down.
They answered that a pro like 5D can make about 150K.
How many shot have you fired with your camera?
Thanks

Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderspark View Post
I think it depends on how much time and storage you have to work with. If I was doing only 600 images in tricky lighting, I'd shoot RAW, but if you don't have the space or time to process, the decision will be made for you.

My last time lapse was a little over 112,000 images, and I shot them JPG to keep it simple. If you expose them right, you won't have to worry about correction, and it saves time with batch processing. When I do day-to-night or vice versa (sunrise, sunset) transitions, RAW is a lot more useful, but I think Disneyland images will be easy to expose correctly. Here's another older one (only about 70,000 images) that were also shot JPG, just to show it can be done and look good. In both examples, I ended up throwing away many thousands of frames to cut out the "boring" parts where they were just digging holes and letting concrete dry, haha.

128GB Class 10 SDXC cards are pretty cheap these days, and I use a pair of them to keep the camera going for long periods of time without having to move it.
ferrarofilms is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2014, 10:53 PM   #9
wonderspark
macrumors 68030
 
wonderspark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferrarofilms View Post
I specifically asked Canon: how many shots a camera is designed for?, thinking on the mirror going up and down.
They answered that a pro like 5D can make about 150K.
How many shot have you fired with your camera?
Thanks
Hmm, never heard that statistic about how many shots a camera can take before, but I checked my current D7000:
30956 shots.

Thing is, I've shot that ~112,000 shot time lapse on a Canon T2i, the ~70,000 one on a previous Nikon D7000 (which was destroyed in a storm), and some other time lapses on a few GoPro cameras.

I'm skeptical that a DSLR will quit after only 150,000 shots myself, but I guess I'll think about it when one of my cameras finally dies. I've had other problems with SLRs and DSLRs, but none have quit because of the mirror action... yet!
__________________
Wait a second... So you're telling me anything that happens in the sky is legal, and there's a giant crime-blimp flying around this place? I don't know how I missed that.
wonderspark is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2014, 10:23 AM   #10
compuwar
macrumors 601
 
compuwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Northern/Central VA
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderspark View Post
I'm skeptical that a DSLR will quit after only 150,000 shots myself, but I guess I'll think about it when one of my cameras finally dies. I've had other problems with SLRs and DSLRs, but none have quit because of the mirror action... yet!
Shutters are mechanical and move very quickly. Like any mechanical part, they have a meantime between failure (MTBF) and life expectancy. Nikon publishes an expected shutter lifetime of 150,000 actuations for the D7000. Canon doesn't publish numbers for the Rebel line, but it's likely to be similar. Things like LiveView take an additional shutter activation, so if you always shoot that way, it can halve your camera's shutter lifetime. On the D7000, a shutter replacement seems to run between $160-320.

Paul
__________________
PaulDRobertson.net
compuwar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2014, 10:40 AM   #11
themumu
macrumors 6502a
 
themumu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Toronto
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferrarofilms View Post
I specifically asked Canon: how many shots a camera is designed for?, thinking on the mirror going up and down.
They answered that a pro like 5D can make about 150K.
150K is a number that is often thrown around as an estimated MTBF for DSLR shutter mechanisms, both Canon and Nikon, regardless of the camera class. The truth is, it's really only an estimate and a lot depends on how you treat your camera in general. Unless a person shoots a lot of time lapses or uses the burst mode often, it's unlikely that they will reach that amount of shots, so very few people can add to this statistical data set.

On the other hand, if you do shoot time lapses, an hour worth of material (24-30 frames per second of output video) will put you around 100K actuations, so among time lapse shooters I would expect to see many people reach and exceed the 150K number. From what I've read, there are not many complaints about shutter failures, and my theory is that when the manufacturers estimate failure times, they take into account the fact that in normal shooting the camera is moved, bumped and exposed to all sorts of outside stress. When you shoot time lapses, it just sits of a tripod quietly for hundreds to thousands of shots, so the effective wear is smaller.
themumu is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2014, 01:36 PM   #12
MCAsan
macrumors 68020
 
MCAsan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta
Your camera always shoots a raw file image. So do you want the camera to:
  • only save the raw file
  • generate a jpg file from the raw and then delete the raw file
  • generate a jpg file and save both the raw and jpg


From a raw file on your computer you can later generate a JPG, TIFF, or other format. From a 8bit JPG, you won't be generating a raw file or high resolution 16bit TIFF file.
__________________
Retina MBP 11,3 2.6GHz | 16GB | 1TB
Thunderbolt Display
iPhone 5s | Silver | 64GB | AT&T
iPad Air | Silver | 128GB | WiFi only
MCAsan is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Aperture Raw+jpeg file size ? Arnkloev Digital Photography 3 Apr 26, 2014 01:53 PM
RAW+JPEG splitting in Aperture Ja Di ksw Digital Photography 4 Dec 28, 2013 05:28 AM
RAW+JPEG management on iPhoto iRock1 Mac Applications and Mac App Store 16 Nov 3, 2013 07:06 PM
iPhoto - how to delete jpeg and RAW files james*b Mac Applications and Mac App Store 0 Jan 29, 2013 04:04 AM
Convert RAW to JPEG on MacBook Pro Sadie M Digital Photography 13 Jul 10, 2012 09:40 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:05 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC