RAW vs JPEG
- Thread starter Marcel
- Start date
Ruidoso Bill
Senior Member
Thanks Marcel, Like I always say you can go from a RAW to a Jpg but cannot go back the other way, loss is just plain loss. Keep all your options open and keep those files big (RAW).
Last edited:
As I understand it, a RAW file is information from the sensor with minimal processing by the camera. Therefore RAW files are not actually 'images' as you need to then process them with external computer and software. This gives you a lot more scope to adjust the rendered image.
I now only shoot in RAW, but am looking at doing some JPG images where I need to save multiple shots quickly.
My D80 can't save faster than 1 photo every 2 seconds in RAW so I'll have a lot less post-capture processing options.
I now only shoot in RAW, but am looking at doing some JPG images where I need to save multiple shots quickly.
My D80 can't save faster than 1 photo every 2 seconds in RAW so I'll have a lot less post-capture processing options.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
Thanks for linking this, Marcel. It points out something that really doesn't seem to get talked about here, and that's the idea that digital photography isn't just about an image on a screen. A photograph is still something physical that gets created from the photographer's work and is hung on a wall - or even just stuck in a wallet.
great article, and one that needs to be digested a bit. never just a right answer.
keep it simple shoot in dual mode. I shoot RAW + JPEG Fine mode, and I organize my shoots in folders keeping the RAW in a subfolder with the JPEGS.
Last nights shoot of ice edits ended all to be RAW sourced, the light was low, and the JPEG just had a tough time rendering the shadows and temperature of the ice, even with me switching from clouds to shadows, and tuning.
but,, neither would I say shoot only in RAW, lots of times the JPEGs are great, with just a few tweaks. and my raw edit falls slightly below the JPEG, and I always say, let the best version win.
keep it simple shoot in dual mode. I shoot RAW + JPEG Fine mode, and I organize my shoots in folders keeping the RAW in a subfolder with the JPEGS.
Last nights shoot of ice edits ended all to be RAW sourced, the light was low, and the JPEG just had a tough time rendering the shadows and temperature of the ice, even with me switching from clouds to shadows, and tuning.
but,, neither would I say shoot only in RAW, lots of times the JPEGs are great, with just a few tweaks. and my raw edit falls slightly below the JPEG, and I always say, let the best version win.
I wouldn't quite phrase it like that. I would say RAW because you've paid huge bucks for a camera with that capability and the fact that shooting RAW doesn't cost anymore than shooting JPEG. But most importantly, those money shots pop up when you least expect them so it's best to always be prepared.
funfortehfun
Senior Member
Well, kinda. My 8GB SD card can only hold Edit: 550 RAW image files. I went for a walk once around a small pond and shot 700+ photos.
16GB SD cards are cheap as dirt though.
Last edited:
Rexer John
Senior Member
In my film days I once took 8 rolls of film on a holiday abroad, seemed a lot back then. How times change.
SkvLTD
Senior Member
Raws are slightly more tedious to view and process, for me anyway, and going through 500 some after an outing for which I'm not at the very least paid, thus most of it is just for personal practice, I simply don't see a reason to go above and beyond in quality. Most of those shots ends up iffy and thrown out anyway.
Now, when there is worthwhile event and I know for a fact I want to try and squeeze the most out of my spent money, then its raw or bust. Kinda like these shots I took if a week after getting my D5100.
Shrek the Halls – Ice Sculpture Showcase, Gaylord National « SKVORA LIMITED
Did I enjoy working with these? Absolutely. Would I do it for 100+ shots? Not for my sole enjoyment of it, no.
Now, when there is worthwhile event and I know for a fact I want to try and squeeze the most out of my spent money, then its raw or bust. Kinda like these shots I took if a week after getting my D5100.
Shrek the Halls – Ice Sculpture Showcase, Gaylord National « SKVORA LIMITED
Did I enjoy working with these? Absolutely. Would I do it for 100+ shots? Not for my sole enjoyment of it, no.
Browncoat
Senior Member
Ah yes, the quintessential photog debate: RAW vs JPEG.
Who's shooting RAW:
High fashion photographers, commercial photographers, just about anyone "who's who in the biz". Those models who grace the covers of magazines don't have silky smooth skin with perfect curves, and those flawless photo spreads for companies aren't really flawless. There's a TON of editing work done. So much so, there's entire crews dedicated to it, and the actual guy who pressed the shutter is often not even involved with it.
Who's shooting JPEG:
Sports photographers, many local pros, including wedding photographers. These are more of the quantity over quality approach as opposed to the above. Those guys on the sidelines with $15,000 lenses are either connected wirelessly to hubs or have memory card runners/swappers to upload those minute-by-minute sports photos to news outlets. Local pros that see 20+ clients a day just don't have time to fiddle around with a bunch of individual tweaks.
There's no right answer. Most of the time I shoot RAW because I like the additional control, and because you can't switch back if you do get one of those "money shots". I will switch to JPEG if I'm covering a sporting event because settings stay mostly the same and speed becomes more important.
Who's shooting RAW:
High fashion photographers, commercial photographers, just about anyone "who's who in the biz". Those models who grace the covers of magazines don't have silky smooth skin with perfect curves, and those flawless photo spreads for companies aren't really flawless. There's a TON of editing work done. So much so, there's entire crews dedicated to it, and the actual guy who pressed the shutter is often not even involved with it.
Who's shooting JPEG:
Sports photographers, many local pros, including wedding photographers. These are more of the quantity over quality approach as opposed to the above. Those guys on the sidelines with $15,000 lenses are either connected wirelessly to hubs or have memory card runners/swappers to upload those minute-by-minute sports photos to news outlets. Local pros that see 20+ clients a day just don't have time to fiddle around with a bunch of individual tweaks.
There's no right answer. Most of the time I shoot RAW because I like the additional control, and because you can't switch back if you do get one of those "money shots". I will switch to JPEG if I'm covering a sporting event because settings stay mostly the same and speed becomes more important.
Scott Murray
Senior Member
I am debating whether to use RAW or JPG while in Africa, I am thinking I will most likely use RAW.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
My take is that if you're on a once in a lifetime trip then it's foolish not to bring back as much as you can from it. Shooting JPG only would be foolish IMO. Yes, you would spend less time in post processing and sharing, but to know that you could have fixed the one thing that otherwise caused you to lose an amazing shot just because you decided not to shoot RAW would be heartbreaking. Why regret it on the back end? There are plenty of programs that will quickly export JPG's from your RAW files, but none of them work the other way.
Scott Murray
Senior Member
Yes this is very true, I am just concerned with the write speed of the D800 and if I take multiple shots in succession. I would have to wait a period of time to be able to re-use the camera and in doing so can also make me miss that perfect shot.
Well you just have to remember that your should not use high rate frames per second to do film. Unless it's a very special moment, you can usually shoot 3-4 frames to get the image you want. I don't see the point in taking 25 images to get one shot. But that's me, I was raised with the single frame SLR and medium format camera and never sprayed and prayed.
Scott Murray
Senior Member
Well you just have to remember that your should not use high rate frames per second to do film. Unless it's a very special moment, you can usually shoot 3-4 frames to get the image you want. I don't see the point in taking 25 images to get one shot. But that's me, I was raised with the single frame SLR and medium format camera and never sprayed and prayed.
I agree I normally take 4-5 and thats plenty.
Love now the dual slot cameras,, but even the single slots can now throw in a 64G card for reasonable cost.
These cards go on sales, especially during black fridays, etc, I have gotten amazing deals,,
Now, I can shoot all day long in dual Raw/Jpegs and not worry about overflowing. Still have
to clear the cards every day, but that is good habit anyway.
These cards go on sales, especially during black fridays, etc, I have gotten amazing deals,,
Now, I can shoot all day long in dual Raw/Jpegs and not worry about overflowing. Still have
to clear the cards every day, but that is good habit anyway.