Discussion in 'Weekly Poll' started by Chrissie_Lay, Oct 25, 2016.
Vote on this week's poll - Do you prefer to shoot in JPEG or raw?
Here's a subject that guaranteed to start a row if another forum I use is anything to go by...
For me it's raw all the way unless:
a) I'm shooting a lot of action in motor drive
b) I'm running short of space on my last card
c) I'm using a camera that I have no raw converter for
d) I'm using a camera that doesn't have raw
e) I want to shoot JPEG
f) I forgot I left the blasted thing in JPEG...
I think that covers everything...
No option for "I shoot raw + JPEG on the cameras that support it, then it depends on what I'm shooting on the ones that can only do one mode at a time". Or even "I mostly shoot raw + JPEG", which might apply to quite a few people.
I agree with this, I used to shoot Raw + JPEG but found it took up too much space when I moved to the D2X so I now only shoot raw except on my Nikon 1J5 raw files from which camera aren't supported by Capture NX2. It would be a complete pain to have the latest Nikon software on one computer simply to convert 1J5 raw files.
I don't see why it is contentious. I use raw only but compared to some I take fairly few pictures and all for myself. I have no pressure to deliver results quickly. Also using Canon if I want to make an "out of the camera" jpg then DPP will do that very nicely at the click of a button. My Fujii is more hassle because so far I just take the files into LR and they always need adjustment. I haven't looked to see if Silkypix will batch process jpgs using camera settings like DPP does. My few attempts to edit with Silkypix have not left a good impression.
The AP articles were reasonably good this week the only bit of jpeg advice that should have had a health warning was the exhortion to use adobe RGB as the colour space. Unless cameras have started to append ICC profiles to their jpgs this means all jpgs have to be postprocessed to add the correct profile.
If I examine the results from shooting a test card I can (just) distinguish the difference between RAW and high quality JPGs but for actual real life pictures I can not tell them apart. That and the fact that so much detail is lost when showing either projected images or prints at A3 or less have convinced me to stick with JPGs
I shoot RAW. I tried RAW+JPG but I find it just takes up too much space and I expend too much effort thinking well, do I keep the JPG or the RAW? It only takes a few moments to go from the RAW to the JPG equivalent in a style I find I enjoy, but I get the benefit of being able to make more changes, if I wanted to, than I would with JPG.
Also, RAW forces me to be more selective with working out what to keep in terms of individual images.
Almost always I shoot raw, however I mostly save the processed images as tiffs and occasionally as jpeg. Especially when intended for the web. Life is too short to save raws on the off chance you might want to try an alternative processing
Yep, whatever works is best. For me, I throw away the JPG's after using them. I have the RAW + the processing steps so I can always get the JPG back, but once gone, you can never go back to the RAW.
I shoot in raw, process the images in LR to provide 16 bit TIFFS for further work in PS, then save as a JPG ( 8 bit). I delete the TIFFs as the files are massive and I can always go back to the raw files if necessary. The only time that I might shoot JPG or raw plus JPG would be if speed were of the essence, e.g. a live news picture, but for all amateur work raw is normally the way.
There are occasions when I might temporarily save the file as a PSD, maybe when I have done a lot of work on an image and have more to do, for example making a complex cut out, but the PSD gets blatted when I have produced a suitable final JPG.
In truth, in my younger days, and at a function where alcohol might be flowing, I might just engage Auto on the camera and let it do the thinking, resulting in JPGs. Far too old and boring for that now......
It varies, and I voted accordingly. At first I would often shoot both, but then I realized that on my DSLRs, at least, I can shoot RAW and then convert to JPEG keeping both should a JPEG be required for quick e-mailing or whatever. On a compact that doesn't have the RAW conversion facility, I'll think about which to choose from shoot to shoot.
I always prefer RAW although do occasionally have to use JPEG to keep file sizes down.
Even on a sports shoot where I'll end up with thousands of shots I'll shoot RAW if I have enough space and will get a chance to get home to process the shots before the deadline. Most of them just end up getting batch processed but it's still nice to be edit out the misses, brighten under-exposed shots and straighten things before the boss sees them.
I always shoot RAW - because I enjoy mucking about in Lightroom and Photoshop as much as I enjoy taking the pictures themselves!
That's not a joke by the way, I really do.
I shoot RAW and JPEG simultaneously, but answered RAW as I rarely use the JPEG. As an amateur I have no time constraints and I actually enjoy the post-processing side of things (I'm a imaging physicist by trade). I did however once use JPEG for shooting bursts of jet-skiers performing stunts, to minimise buffer issues.
I shoot RAW most of the time but if I think I may need to rapidly produce a wodge of contact sheets or have files ready quickly for a crit I will shoot RAW and jpeg, print off the jpegs quickly and use them to select which RAW files are worth further work. Ordinarily though I shoot raw, duplicate and work on the file and save it as a TIFF. If I need to upload it online I"ll create a jpeg for web that I delete once the image has appeared where needs to be.
I prefer raw for fruit but onions are better fried. Oh! Have I misunderstood?
Shooting in jpg mode is akin to using the cheapest eBay film and then having the D&P, 6X4 prints, done in a Superstore...
But then again, I heard of an old "Gent" who only used first & second gear to drive anywhere.
I do a very simple presentation to show the difference between 8-Bit & 16-Bit editing and the way the banding & blocking is produced in the 8-Bit images.
Usually only raw but sometimes raw + jpeg if immediate prints are needed. I haven't yet got round to producing the odd jpeg using in camera processing but I have that option should I take the trouble to work out how to do it.
I practically always shoot raw + JPEG unless I’m just trying to capture information, rather than a “picture”. I’ve never owned a digital camera that wouldn’t save both (although before I bought a compact, I occasionally used my wife’s JPEG-only point and shoot). I rarely shoot action bursts, my cameras are usually set to bracket exposures, and I don’t find the time taken to save or transfer files a problem.
I’ve only got round to editing a small proportion of my raw files (so far), but the capacity of external hard drives continues to increase, and whenever one fills, I find about £100 will buy me a new drive that will hold my entire current collection with room to spare (I’m currently using a 5TB drive, with a 3TB acting as backup). So storage costs far less than the cameras, lenses, etc I use to capture my photos, and it seems sensible to save the best possible quality raw files I can for possible future editing, if I want to get the best out of them, together with the best possible out-of-camera JPEGs for convenience.
It seems very remiss to have omitted the raw + JPEG option from the poll; I couldn’t vote for any of the available choices.
I thought it was more like using the camera in one of the several ways it was intended to be used.
Separate names with a comma.