I never shoot raw…ever
I’m curious about peaking. I find that shooting mono makes peaking much easier to see than when shooting colour. But I’m then forever stuck with a mono JPEG
Am I correct in thinking if I shot both raw & jpeg but the jpeg’s were set to mono, that would give both EVF and rear screen a mono image but the raw could if needed be turned back to colour.
I’m away at the moment and don’t have the opportunity to check, but the question has been playing on my mind and I thought best to ask here.
Yes, regardless of shooting in B&W the RAW file will contain the color data and you can process it later in color or B&W.
One advantage of color is that you can mix the color channels in processing to control the B&W output sort of like using filters.
EB-1 wrote:
Yes, regardless of shooting in B&W the RAW file will contain the color data and you can process it later in color or B&W.
One advantage of color is that you can mix the color channels in processing to control the B&W output sort of like using filters.
EBH
Thanks for replying and confirming
I currently upload the images to my iPhone then add the Silvertone (BW) filter.
That’s really as far as I’m interested. The reason for wanting both EVF and rear screen in mono is both for peaking and to help visualise how it will look in mono. Canon mono is…. meh… it’s ok. But I much prefer the iPhone silvertone filter. It harks back to the late British photographer Bob Carlos Clark who became famous for his pre-flashing technique in the darkroom (early 90’s). Basically pre-flashing the unexposed paper before exposing to the negative. The results are very very similar to silvertone.
Apr 27, 2026 at 04:59 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Pixelpuffin wrote:
Thanks for replying and confirming
I currently upload the images to my iPhone then add the Silvertone (BW) filter.
That’s really as far as I’m interested. The reason for wanting both EVF and rear screen in mono is both for peaking and to help visualise how it will look in mono. Canon mono is…. meh… it’s ok. But I much prefer the iPhone silvertone filter. It harks back to the late British photographer Bob Carlos Clark who became famous for his pre-flashing technique in the darkroom (early 90’s). Basically pre-flashing the unexposed paper before exposing to the negative. The results are very very similar to silvertone. ...Show more →
One disadvantage to shooting in RAW is that the files are much larger. You may not want to download RAW files to your phone and process them there. If you have a lot of files that might be a slow and somewhat tedious process--that will depend on how you connect your phone to the camera and how well your phone can process large files.
I (and I believe the vast majority of people who shoot RAW) add a step. They download the files to a computer. Process the RAW files in the computer, and only then upload them and/or print them. You might not want that extra step, but I believe the camera and almost all processing software is designed expecting that work flow for RAW files.
Steve Spencer wrote:
One disadvantage to shooting in RAW is that the files are much larger. You may not want to download RAW files to your phone and process them there. If you have a lot of files that might be a slow and somewhat tedious process--that will depend on how you connect your phone to the camera and how well your phone can process large files.
I (and I believe the vast majority of people who shoot RAW) add a step. They download the files to a computer. Process the RAW files in the computer, and only then upload them and/or print them. You might not want that extra step, but I believe the camera and almost all processing software is designed expecting that work flow for RAW files. ...Show more →
I doubt I’ll ever download to my phone
It’s really should I need the colour.
But tbh pondering it kver now
I really do like the simplicity of shooting and uploading to iPhone and adding silvertone
Pixelpuffin wrote:
I never shoot raw…ever
I’m curious about peaking. I find that shooting mono makes peaking much easier to see than when shooting colour. But I’m then forever stuck with a mono JPEG
y
Am I correct in thinking if I shot both raw & jpeg but the jpeg’s were set to mono, that would give both EVF and rear screen a mono image but the raw could if needed be turned back to colour.
I’m away at the moment and don’t have the opportunity to check, but the question has been playing on my mind and I thought best to ask here.
Anyone??
As a general rule, camera settings like choosing monochrome or setting an aspect ratio crop do not affect the raw file data.
The proprietary raw file will include information about what settings were used, and if your raw conversion software recognizes them it may use that as the starting point when you open the file in the raw converter… but the full underlying raw data (color, for example) is still there.
So, yes, if you shoot in raw+jpg mode, your raw fill will retain all of the original exposure data… in color.
One little warning about peaking. The peak reading is most likely based on an average of the luminosity in the three color channels. The danger is that if one channel is “hot” it ma not show a peak even though that channel could get blown out. You see this frequently with subjects that have a hot red channel, such as fall foliage, sunsets, and similar. Even though your basic histogram may look OK, you may find that you lose details in the image where the hot color predominated.
To follow up on what Dan said about the histogram, most cameras have the option to display the histogram as individual RGB color channels rather than overall brightness. This can help you identify when a particular channel may be peaking.
Please don't take this is a criticism, but shooting only JPEGs is a bit like getting a set of prints from a roll of film and then throwing away the negatives. Even if you almost always use the JPEGs straight out of camera, having the RAW files could prove important somewhere down the line.
Obviously in your case, having the flexibility to capture *both* color (RAW) and B&W (JPEG) at the same time could be useful.
garyvot wrote:
To follow up on what Dan said about the histogram, most cameras have the option to display the histogram as individual RGB color channels rather than overall brightness. This can help you identify when a particular channel may be peaking.
Please don't take this is a criticism, but shooting only JPEGs is a bit like getting a set of prints from a roll of film and then throwing away the negatives. Even if you almost always use the JPEGs straight out of camera, having the RAW files could prove important somewhere down the line.
Obviously in your case, having the flexibility to capture *both* color (RAW) and B&W (JPEG) at the same time could be useful....Show more →
Re-RAW
The bottom line is I have absolutely zero interest to shoot RAW…
None whatsoever.
I enjoy the sooc JPEGs
Quick and simple.
Just the idea of tweaking each image with almost infinite array of tools does nothing for me whatsoever.
None of mine are ever printed, most are rarely viewed again and a lot just get deleted.
If film wasn’t so expensive I’d definitely go back.
EB-1 wrote:
Using a camera, then a phone is way more complicated that shooting RAW, but I guess you are used to doing it. Why not just use the phone by itself?
EBH
Because the image breaks up when you zoom in
I also like using the viewfinder.. it’s like I’m viewing a stage….i get to choose which scene I I want to save…simply by pressing a button.
All I need is an accurate means of focus either peaking or AF and a means of controlling exposure.
Almost everything else just gets in the way to overcomplicate things.
Apr 29, 2026 at 12:50 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Pixelpuffin wrote:
Because the image breaks up when you zoom in
I also like using the viewfinder.. it’s like I’m viewing a stage….i get to choose which scene I I want to save…simply by pressing a button.
All I need is an accurate means of focus either peaking or AF and a means of controlling exposure.
Almost everything else just gets in the way to overcomplicate things.
To answer your original question, if you set up your viewfinder and the jpgs produced by your camera to shoot in monochrome and you shot in jpg and RAW, then what you would need to do if you want to have some images in color is grab the RAW files from your card and load them into your RAW converter of choice, then just save them as a jpg. You don't need to do anything more with the files if you don't want to do so. You can even use the Canon DPP software that likely came with your camera to convert the RAW files to jpgs. The resulting jpgs will look very much like if you had shot in color and just saved the jpgs.
Developing RAW files can be done with either lots of post processing or close to zero post processing. The choice of how much to do is up to you. Personally, I do a little but gave up doing extensive post processing a long time ago.
Pixelpuffin wrote:
Re-RAW
The bottom line is I have absolutely zero interest to shoot RAW…
None whatsoever.
I enjoy the sooc JPEGs
Quick and simple.
Just the idea of tweaking each image with almost infinite array of tools does nothing for me whatsoever.
None of mine are ever printed, most are rarely viewed again and a lot just get deleted.
If film wasn’t so expensive I’d definitely go back.
Miss the simplicity and…..en-prints!!
Very odd, then, that you would post a question about… raw.
Pixelpuffin wrote:
Am I correct in thinking if I shot both raw & jpeg but the jpeg’s were set to mono, that would give both EVF and rear screen a mono image but the raw could if needed be turned back to colour.
Just use your phone, don’t worry about, and you’ll be happy. I guess.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Very odd, then, that you would post a question about… raw.
Just use your phone, don’t worry about, and you’ll be happy. I guess.
Yes, I see the contradiction
But as mentioned in my OP
I want to shoot primarily mono jpegs as I find peaking easier to see in mono.
But realise at some point I may wish I’d shot the scene in colour. Obviously mono JPEG won’t have colour. So my only option it seems is to either shoot both RAW and JPEG and just never bother with the raw files OR if I were to use a camera with two card slots maybe there’s a possibility I could assign both cards to JPEG, one for mono and one for colour.
I think some camera manufacturers let you generate multiple jpeg profiles automatically, but Canon doesn't. You don't need any post processing software as you can convert raw files into jpegs directly in your camera. So shoot raw and then convert to your jpeg(s) of choice. Or you could shoot raw plus jpeg, upload your jpegs, and if you decide you want a different profile, just convert the raw file that's still on your camera to a different profile and upload to your computer. Delete the raw files on your card if you don't want them. I never do this, but you seem to have some aversion to raw files, so this is my suggestion.
By the way, you are always shooting in raw. The camera just converts it to jpeg when you specify jpeg only.
osidesurfer wrote:
I think some camera manufacturers let you generate multiple jpeg profiles automatically, but Canon doesn't. You don't need any post processing software as you can convert raw files into jpegs directly in your camera. So shoot raw and then convert to your jpeg(s) of choice. Or you could shoot raw plus jpeg, upload your jpegs, and if you decide you want a different profile, just convert the raw file that's still on your camera to a different profile and upload to your computer. Delete the raw files on your card if you don't want them. I never do this, but you seem to have some aversion to raw files, so this is my suggestion.
By the way, you are always shooting in raw. The camera just converts it to jpeg when you specify jpeg only....Show more →
You are correct in that I have an “aversion” to raw
For me it’s just another layer of faff and wasting time. As mentioned up thread I never print pictures. In fact I think the only photos I’ve printed off in the past 20yrs was my phone pics or a digital compact I used to use.
I guess I’m just not that bothered enough no more.
I enjoy taking the pictures and uploading to my phone and sharing with friends/family via SM
But this poring over RAWs, constantly tweaking curves/levels etc etc absolutely does nothing for me at all. I don’t/wont waste time faffing like that.
My pictures are just snaps - nothing more
I’m not so arrogant to think my pictures are special, they simply record a moment I witnessed.
You can usually choose what colour to use for focus peaking in the camera’s settings.
However, accurate autofocus has been a solved problem for a long time now. If you know how much depth of field to expect at a given focal length and distance, you can just set the focus point and press the shutter. For me, that’s the quickest way to take a photo. Perhaps it doesn’t work well with the cheap low-end cameras and lenses you seem to favour.
melcat wrote:
You can usually choose what colour to use for focus peaking in the camera’s settings.
However, accurate autofocus has been a solved problem for a long time now. If you know how much depth of field to expect at a given focal length and distance, you can just set the focus point and press the shutter. For me, that’s the quickest way to take a photo. Perhaps it doesn’t work well with the cheap low-end cameras and lenses you seem to favour.
The hyperfocal distance technique is a far cry from actually focusing on the subject itself.
Pixelpuffin wrote:
You are correct in that I have an “aversion” to raw
For me it’s just another layer of faff and wasting time. As mentioned up thread I never print pictures. In fact I think the only photos I’ve printed off in the past 20yrs was my phone pics or a digital compact I used to use.
If you just want a jpeg that is as good or better than what the camera produces, that's about a 10 second edit.
