How do you shoot? raw vs jpeg

[Hackbone]

Just taking a poll to see how you shoot. Choose one.

[coldclimb]

Ah, but it depends! If I'll be getting a really high volume or lighting is good and I'm not concerned about missing something critical, as in some of my shoots of construction jobsites, I'll use jpeg. If it's important that I get every perfect shot I can like in a portrait session, or if lighting is less than nice, I'll shoot raw. Space is cheap these days, but I still have a hard time using up 20 gigs of space for a single shoot!

[reyvee61]

Always 14bit uncompressed RAW

[chuckinsocal]

Just taking a poll to see how you shoot. Choose one.

RAW 100% of the time. The downside is that I have to process every shot I take which can be a bit tedious sometimes. The upside is that I get full control of that processing and of how the final image looks and in the long run that off sets the need to process each image.

[MileHighAko]

I started out only shooting in jpg, because I didn't know any better.

Then I switched to 100% RAW, again because I didn't know any better.

Now my format and size is a calculated decision, just like deciding to shoot in manual vs. aperture, etc. I try to be crisp in those decisions, vs. just using one format because it's the safest. At current, 70% RAW, 30% something else.

[zoomer]

I shoot both, depending on the situation and/or the lighting variation.

[Hackbone]

Personally I always shoot raw, even weddings with 4 or 5 hundred shots. However I'm not much of an overshooter. That is certain death and to me marks you as one not certain of what your doing.
It's too easy to bump a setting when shooting and raw will save you more than a jpeg.
Try to think of raw as a negative and jpeg as a polaroid.

[r3t1awr3yd]

RAW changed my life....

[Mitchell]

Both. If I'm shooting outdoor sports with consistent skies, I'll shoot JPG. This helps my speed and cuts down on my processing of hundreds of files. For any type of event photography (weddings, etc..) with mixed lighting, I always shoot RAW. Lately, I've been shooting both with portraits using my strobes. I'm finding that for this type of controlled setting with manually set WB, there is no advantage to me in shooting RAW.

[Svennie]

I shoot RAW+jpg :evil
But in more general: depends. For photo shoots, weddings etc definitely RAW. Other more point and shoot opportunities like the local taekwondo grading: jpg. These will end up on internet in low res anyway, so I save myself the trouble :wink

[cab.in.boston]

Always 14bit uncompressed RAW

Why uncompressed when lossless is, well, lossless? :D

[Justiceiro]

RAW has saved my behind on more than one occasion.

[kris10jo]

recently converted to raw...

[Andy]

I'm sorry but this question is not a good one. Use the right format for the job. I shoot RAW for all my landscapes, and portraits and commercial work.

But I shoot JPG for all of my event work. I work with my camera settings, experiment, and get really comfortable and familiar with them. And when I shoot an event with 1000s of shots, I have it nailed right out of the camera and I don't have to do any post processing at all to present and sell my photos.

[Hackbone]

Even for my event work it is still raw and that has saved me several times. It is way too easy to move a setting especially during an event. At least for me it is.

Why raw........read this....http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml

[Icebear]

RAW + LR presets. Why not?
The only reason I might ever shoot JPEG is 'cause my cameras will give me a higher frame rate. But I can get 5-6 fps with RAW and that's plenty fer me.

[Jeremy Winterberg]

I shoot jpg more and more these days. I use an expodisc and get near perfect results sooc, both white balance and exposure. Really saves time in post processing.

[yendikeno]

shoot raw pretty much 99% of the time.

[kevinpw]

When I started I only used JPEGs because I didn't know what the heck RAW was. Then I learned about RAW, and I shot 100% in RAW. Recently I felt that when lighting is good, especially outdoors under the sun, RAW doesn't help me much, so I'll use JPEG to save on HD space and processing time. If I'm in a rather dark place, or indoors, or using external flash, I'd choose RAW.

I chose JPEG in the poll just because I knew most people would choose RAW :p

[kevinpw]

I shoot jpg more and more these days. I use an expodisc and get near perfect results sooc, both white balance and exposure. Really saves time in post processing.

What is an expodisc?

[Jeremy Winterberg]

What is an expodisc?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=expodisc

Its a custom white balance tool. But you can also use it to set exposure. Its very handy, and super easy to use.

[Debashis_A_ghosh]

I shoot Raw when I want to get every bit of detail that I can retrieve form the shot. The JPEG version created in the camera lacks the details/sharpnesn...clarity (for lack of better words). This is usually when I am out shooting portraits for friends and family in a session dedicated to taking pictuires, or when I am out shooting insect Macros.
For general purpose street shots where I am not very concerendd about whether or not I get the shot I go with jpeg.

The biggest negative of RAW format for me is that once I have a good image in jpeg (Raw converted to jpeg) I find it very very tough to bring myself to delete the RAW file. Resultantly I keep runnig out of disc space. I need to start taking DVD copies and then delete off the RAW files form my hard drives.

[Hackbone]

What is an expodisc?

It is a special filter that goes on the front of the lens and will give you a white balance to start from.

Tip.......you buy them to screw into the lens you are using it on. Buy the largest one instead and then you can hold it on the front of any lens your using to get the white balance.

[mercphoto]

Just taking a poll to see how you shoot. Choose one.

I shoot RAW 100% of the time. Even when I do track events and walk away with 1,500+ photos of cars on the track. Overkill? Yes it is. But I have a workflow down in Aperture that makes it a breeze. I have to admit though, if I ever ditch the 40D for a 7D I'll reconsider this, if only from a file size standpoint.

[ivar]

Raw, mainly. I generally don't shoot the type of shots where JPG is easier.

Since this is interesting to more than just people shooters, I've moved this to the Technique forum :thumb

[BuddyLee]

I answered RAW just because this is the people forum. Portraits, weddings, low light, i shoot raw because, why not? I have the needed space in memory cards and with today's work flow, working with raw is not difficult. I shoot a lot of sporting events where it is required I shoot JPG. I think this helps keep me honest. Even when I shoot raw, i try my hardest to get the shot i want in the camera.

[catspaw]

most of the time, RAW. in the E-PL1, JPG :P

[Hackbone]

I want to keep harping on this. Raw will save you headaches when that instance of mishap happens and it will.

It's not a question of size (speaking of computers) but quality. Please read http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...aw-files.shtml (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml)

[pathfinder]

I'm sorry but this question is not a good one. Use the right format for the job. I shoot RAW for all my landscapes, and portraits and commercial work.

But I shoot JPG for all of my event work. I work with my camera settings, experiment, and get really comfortable and familiar with them. And when I shoot an event with 1000s of shots, I have it nailed right out of the camera and I don't have to do any post processing at all to present and sell my photos.

Yup, I shoot both, depending on the situations.

I even shoot RAW + jpg at times.

Why are things always expressed as either/ or?

I like both.

[Hackbone]

Because what else would we be doing if we weren't destroying electrons rehashing old arguments that don't have an absolute answer (the best kind ;)) , we might have to go do some work lol. That really would kill the internet.

Did not know it was an old rehash. Sorry you wasted your time.

[Jeremy Winterberg]

Did not know it was an old rehash.

really?

[Hackbone]

Honest Injun, cross my fingers and hope to die.

[Jeremy Winterberg]

Honest Injun, cross my fingers and hope to die.

lol.. well, FYI its been a hot argument topic since digital came out.

[Hackbone]

Was trying to help some folks out on another part of the forum from making some mistakes that I made. Newbies.

[Art Scott]

I chose raw on the [poll....but you were actually missing an option...Raw+jpeg....which is what I actually shoot......
There are times when the sooc jpeg is good enuff for a client for printing but I want that raw file to work on if need be.....
I take lots of time in shot prep to cut down on PP...so I am ecstatic when I get great jpegs sooc......

[Hackbone]

Art, I agree with shooting both at the same time. Will save you one day. I'm just trying to impress on beginners the importance of shooting raw for a better file and to not be afraid of it.

[chuckinsocal]

I want to keep harping on this. Raw will save you headaches when that instance of mishap happens and it will.

It's not a question of size (speaking of computers) but quality. Please read http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...aw-files.shtml (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml)

Thank you for that link! Best article on RAW vs JPEG I ever read.

[divamum]

Raw, unless there's a very compelling reason to shoot jpg (eg frame rate, problem with memory space, especially requested by auspices ie when I did the Strobist shoot, need to present many images without a chance to process manually etc)

Especially for the variable light in my theatre shoots it's very helpful.

[Hackbone]

Richy, sorry I took it the wrong way. You're correct on hard to read tone over the net. Anyway too old to worry about it. Have a great Merry Christmas to you and you group.

[ThatCanonGuy]

How about Raw+Jpg? That's what I do mostly.

[hgernhardtjr]

I, too, shoot RAW+JPG, so won't vote. The survey is not really valid without a check for "both".

[Jeremy Winterberg]

Lol, as a marketing major I was going to say something about it being bias, but I kept my mouth shut.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

[Hackbone]

If your really smart and have the money you should shoot both. But in real life with beginngers thru professionals it is amazing how many do one or the other. Never meant to be scientific. Like in life.....you can't please everyone so one should stop trying.

[ThatCanonGuy]

I voted raw because I use the raw files 99.99% of the time. The only reason I shoot raw+jpg (instead of just raw) is so I can preview the images faster, and delete both raws and jpg (since jpgs are faster to view than raws). I then delete the jpgs and PP the raws.

[BradfordBenn]

This question can be a little misleading as it is not often a selection, it is decided by the hardware. I have a P & S that does not shoot RAW, so I shoot JPG with it. On my DSLR I shoot RAW most of the time, but not exclusively. There is always a trade off between the options. RAW requires a little more in the workflow; but since the information is not already decimated (true annotation, not connotation) it provides for less errors when doing mathematical adjustments (post processing). Is it better? Your choice and opinion, to me getting the shot in the first place is the important part. :) Prefer RAW but not going to go nuts if situational boundaries make it JPG as I have as many good JPG pictures as I do RAW.

[pathfinder]

Exactly.

My DMC-ZS7 does not shoot RAW, but but does shoot tiffs or jpgs. I use either depending on my intentions for the image. I can get grainless 8x10s from it.

[Baldy]

I shoot jpg more and more these days. I use an expodisc and get near perfect results sooc, both white balance and exposure. Really saves time in post processing.+1

I usually have someone do the post-processing and zipping up a ton of RAWs and transmitting them is no fun. I'll flip to RAW for a few shots if I don't feel I have good control of exposure or white balance in some situations.

But if it's a landscape or HDR? RAW at 100 ISO. Totally different from a wedding or other big event.

[Jeremy Winterberg]

+1

I usually have someone do the post-processing and zipping up a ton of RAWs and transmitting them is no fun. I'll flip to RAW for a few shots if I don't feel I have good control of exposure or white balance in some situations.

Who do you outsource your editing with? I've been thinking about doing this for a while.

Jeremy

[Jeremy Winterberg]

I'm also interested, I'd still outsource suppin an tuppin before PP but it seems popular, perhaps time for a rethink lol

I hear shootdotedit is really good. and I have some photographer friends that do editing too.. Just curious if he uses a different company than what I'm checking out.

[oddfodder]

I started out shooting RAW but I found that it was too tedious to process. I'm sure there are a few good images that got away because I didn't shoot RAW, but the rest of the images I shot without having to convert them made it worthwhile. Not to say there isn't a benefit to shooting raw. I think if I were trying to eek out every detail in my image, I would be a RAW freak...

[JMichaelK]

I started shooting only RAW a couple of years ago and just learned how to best work with that format. To me shooting jpegs is like shooting film and only getting 4x6 prints back from the lab without the negatives. There are too many options available when shooting RAW that are not as available with jpeg. I also prefer to process the images myself rather than let the camera decide what looks best. When we shoot jpeg the camera makes a lot of decisions about how the image will look, when we shoot RAW, we get to decide. Storage is my biggest problem with shooting RAW. I have plenty of storage and it costs less for external hard drives these days, it is more about connecting all the storage. I have about 16TB of external hard drives and it is a real pain to get them all cataloged in Lightroom. There is also an issue with daisy chaining all those drives, especially with Firewire 800. I'll still shoot RAW no matter what.

[mercphoto]

JMichaelK, any need to keep all those images on-line at all times? One thing I always liked about iView Media Pro was how it would store thumbnails only locally and allow you to look at small versions of your images, still apply keywords and rankings, organize images into groups and collections, while the large files are offline on some disk in a closet somewhere. Very handy.

Can you have multiple Lightroom catalogs, one for each driver perhaps?

As per the camera making decisions for you, I agree. Remember everyone, ALL OF US SHOOT IN RAW. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US. The only differences is, is the RAW converter you use inside your camera, or is it on your computer? Once you get your head around this concept the whole question of "raw versus jpg" takes on a whole new slant.

[JMichaelK]

JMichaelK, any need to keep all those images on-line at all times? One thing I always liked about iView Media Pro was how it would store thumbnails only locally and allow you to look at small versions of your images, still apply keywords and rankings, organize images into groups and collections, while the large files are offline on some disk in a closet somewhere. Very handy.

Can you have multiple Lightroom catalogs, one for each driver perhaps?

As per the camera making decisions for you, I agree. Remember everyone, ALL OF US SHOOT IN RAW. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US. The only differences is, is the RAW converter you use inside your camera, or is it on your computer? Once you get your head around this concept the whole question of "raw versus jpg" takes on a whole new slant.
I have my Lightroom set to discard the 1:1 previews after a week, which I believe means that only a preview image is stored. I also start a new catalog with every new hard drive. The issue is that when hard drives go bad and that happens more than I prefer, I end creating a new catalog of the same images on a new hard drive. It is more about keeping up with everything and maintaining some order. I keep most of my hard drives turned off when not in use, but sometimes I need them all on when searching for a certain image. After spending quite a bit of time talking with the tech guys at different hard drive manufacturers I have discovered that daisy chaining lots of hard drives is bad for the drives, especially when using firewire 800. There is a new USB 3 coming out which hopefully eliminate some of the issues I am having.

[pathfinder]

eSATA for external drives really rocks!

[Art Scott]

Who do you outsource your editing with? I've been thinking about doing this for a while.

Jeremy

Happy Fish Designs...and they allow FTP uploading or mail in a Disk........they do great work.

[TonyCooper]

I'm one of those people that usually shoots RAW only, but sometimes
switches over to .jpg only for action shots on a bright and sunny day
where I'm taking burst multiple images to freeze action. Sports, usually.

The only time this has been a problem is when I forget to change
back to RAW when I change scenes or subject matter. Invariably,
there's a capture that I wish was a RAW capture.

[Philip Goh]

+1

I usually have someone do the post-processing and zipping up a ton of RAWs and transmitting them is no fun.

In your experience, how do JPEGs handle the post-processing?

[six2one]

when i am doing some fancy work and am taking less than 300 shots i will use raw. if i am at the track and shooting i will use jpg cause i will have about 2600 shots before the day is out

[Tas67]

I used to shoot Raw and Jpeg but noticed how the skin tones would start looking funky when processing jpg. So, now I shoot only Raw.

[stevenrecords]

RAW of course. And I will sometimes shoot TIFF so I can have the uncompressed file with internal camera adjustments. Although that's not on the list