# 6d settings, what's best for editing and quality



## Aakajx (Feb 22, 2014)

Hi all, can you please help me by telling me what's best to shoot with for picture quality and editing? ATM I have it on JPEG. Thanks.


----------



## 71M (Feb 22, 2014)

JPEG: low ISO, natural colour style, and low contrast setting. Raw: low ISO and the colour/contrast doesn't matter. Check the camera's set for sRGB rather than Adobe RGB.


----------



## EIngerson (Feb 22, 2014)

Since you said quality and editing, raw. It gives you all the information the camera captures and the most flexibility when editing.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 22, 2014)

71M said:


> JPEG: low ISO, natural colour style, and low contrast setting. Raw: low ISO and the colour/contrast doesn't matter. *Check the camera's set for sRGB rather than Adobe RGB*.



that part in bold is arguable and depends on other things that may be toocmplex for discussion now.


----------



## 71M (Feb 22, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> 71M said:
> 
> 
> > JPEG: low ISO, natural colour style, and low contrast setting. Raw: low ISO and the colour/contrast doesn't matter. *Check the camera's set for sRGB rather than Adobe RGB*.
> ...



Why? wider gamut?


----------



## Big Mike (Feb 24, 2014)

71M said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > 71M said:
> ...


AdobeRGB has a larger Gamut, thus is better for editing, could be said to be a better quality...but they would have to remember to convert it back to sRGB for web viewing or sending to a client or lab etc.



> Hi all, can you please help me by telling me what's best to shoot with for picture quality and editing? ATM I have it on JPEG. Thanks.


By definition, shooting in JPEG is reducing the quality of any image.  Raw format has the highest potential quality because it basically includes all of the information that the sensor records....it just requires you to process it into an image.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 24, 2014)

71M said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > 71M said:
> ...



Yes, I hate to throw anything away.


----------



## bigal1000 (Mar 5, 2014)

Raw..........


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 5, 2014)

> _that part in bold is arguable and depends on other things *that may be too complex for discussion now.*_


Bolded part is why you should shoot sRGB most of the time, IMO. The other is only better for complex reasons in specialized circumstances, adds complexity to your workflow, and has almost as good of a chance of being forgotten and thus backfiring on you if posting to the web, for instance, as it does benefiting you.


----------



## The_Traveler (Mar 5, 2014)

Gavjenks said:


> > _that part in bold is arguable and depends on other things *that may be too complex for discussion now.*_
> 
> 
> Bolded part is why you should shoot sRGB most of the time, IMO. The other is only better for complex reasons in specialized circumstances, adds complexity to your workflow, and has almost as good of a chance of being forgotten and thus backfiring on you if posting to the web, for instance, as it does benefiting you.



Interestingly put but ignoring factual issues and thus misleading to beginner photographers. Like telling children there is a Santa Claus to avoid the discussion about where gifts really come from. All grownups know both that there is no Santa Claus and, for many situation, raw is best.


----------



## kathyt (Mar 5, 2014)

What are you editing in?


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 5, 2014)

> Interestingly put but ignoring factual issues and thus misleading to beginner photographers. Like telling children there is a Santa Claus to avoid the discussion about where gifts really come from. All grownups know both that there is no Santa Claus and, for many situation, raw is best.


Yes, RAW I do not disagree with. Well actually, I suggest Jpeg + RAW at once. And actually, this distinction is another reason why I suggest sRGB. Because sRGB vs. AdobeRGB is meaningless if and when you edit for RAW, because you can change it later and it doesn't apply that stuff since it's raw data and is meaningless anyway there. So that means the only time your colorspace settings will matter is if you're just grabbing the jpeg version right off your card in a hurry and are not botehring with raw editing.

And when do you grab the jpeg version most often? Personally, I grab the jpeg most often when it's just a snapshot I want to share with friends on facebook or something, and not a legitimate photoshoot for money or anything artistically important to me. *Therefore, almost 100% of the time when the colorspace is even applied by the camera, it's the web-friendly sRGB I want anyway.* Whereas for the technical shots where I care about utmost quality, I'm using RAW, and the settings don't matter in the first place.


----------



## vimwiz (Mar 5, 2014)

Gavjenks said:


> Yes, RAW I do not disagree with. Well actually, I suggest Jpeg + RAW at once.



Unless you have a slow body with a small buffer + bus, which makes it difficult to shoot bursts in that mode. In that case, one may be a reasonable sacrifice.


----------



## intelygente (Mar 14, 2014)

Definitely RAW+ JPEG. 

Productora de Video y Fotografía en Bogotá, Colombia.


----------

