Shooting RAW is a waste of time

[Eduard]

As the person who got this thread going, a personal attack was never the intent. IMHO shooting RAW provides the most latitude for using an image. As Helene stated previously, it is the negative. Even if it is only one image out of (possibly) hundreds that require the use of advanced techniques that can only be done with a RAW file, it is not like you can go back and reshoot a wedding. I'm not a wedding photographer, never claimed to be, but to me the mark of a professional is someone who maximizes the use of his/her tools in a way that an amateur like me is not able to do. Be it a hammer, a paintbrush or a camera.

I wanted to try to understand the thought process behind shooting JPEG. In my experience, I've only shot JPEG in order to maximize speed during sporting events.

 

[theregsy]

With a wedding conditions change rapidly sometimes. Specially if it is an outdoor wedding. It is not as clear cut as you may think.

Nearly every situation can change rapidly, but the principle applies, set shoot until things change, set shoot some more, doesn't matter if its wildlife, weddings, sports whatever. I remember shooting a wedding for a friend (yes still friends) with a Pentax Z10, shot around 20 rolls of 36exp film from the guests turning up through to the end of the night do, without film constraints I would easily have quadrupled this total all because you just don't have worry about running out.

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

So his site is 1and1photography ? I always wanted to see his photography.

NO ONE has the right to tell you that you are wrong, stupid, and idiot for shooting the way you do.

If, what the person is "teaching" goes wholly against the way that 100,000 other pro photographers say, yes we do. If it has an adverse effect on the industry, yes we do. Advise is only good when it is right. Wedding photography is a 50/50 deal, party artistic and part photo-journalistic.

 

[Eye-level]

I don't know anything at all...I'm going to Canada! LOL

 

[theregsy]

, but to me the mark of a professional is someone who maximizes the use of his/her tools in a way that an amateur like me is not able to do. Be it a hammer, a paintbrush or a camera.

I wanted to try to understand the thought process behind shooting JPEG. In my experience, I've only shot JPEG in order to maximize speed during sporting events.

But would the argument not be that if you used the tools that you have at your disposal mean that you wouldn't have to post process? LOL Sorry please don't think that there is a right and wrong answer for this question

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

Nearly every situation can change rapidly, but the principle applies, set shoot until things change, set shoot some more, doesn't matter if its wildlife, weddings, sports whatever. I remember shooting a wedding for a friend (yes still friends) with a Pentax Z10, shot around 20 rolls of 36exp film from the guests turning up through to the end of the night do, without film constraints I would easily have quadrupled this total all because you just don't have worry about running out.

absolutley!!! thats my point. if you have to turn for that 1 shot at Aunt Edna, the white balance is thrown off. IF that shot was taken in RAW, it can be adjusted. I shot one with a Pentax ZX30 once... never again lol. Still have that camera to.

 

[theregsy]

If, what the person is "teaching" goes wholly against the way that 100,000 other pro photographers say, yes we do. If it has an adverse effect on the industry, yes we do. Advise is only good when it is right. Wedding photography is a 50/50 deal, party artistic and part photo-journalistic.

Sorry to disagree again, if someone takes bad photos it doesn't matter if they are RAW or Jpeg, 100,000 people said the sun revolved around the earth. Shoot ing in jpeg does NOT have an adverse effect on the industry, how can it? By the time the image is presented either by printing or on a website there is no way to tell what format its in is there? A consensus isn't always right either, as long as the image is good and the customer likes it the format of shooting doesn't matter one iota.

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

Sorry to disagree again, if someone takes bad photos it doesn't matter if they are RAW or Jpeg, 100,000 people said the sun revolved around the earth. Shooting in jpeg does NOT have an adverse effect on the industry, how can it? By the time the image is presented either by printing or on a website there is no way to tell what format its in is there? A consensus isn't always right either, as long as the image is good and the customer likes it the format of shooting doesn't matter one iota.

I will have to address your post in sections so be patient.
First, a "bad" photo is a bad photo. regardless of Raw or JPEG = agreed! but a slight white balance can be fixed in post if taken in RAW
Second, I was not so much referring to the shooting in raw vs jpg to having the effect on industry as a whole, but as to the idea of teaching against the grain of tried and true processes
Third, printing or web has no bearing as to the reason to shoot raw or jpg. Shooting raw has to do with using the best tools for the job at hand to give the client the best possible image that YOU created.
Fourth, a consensus derived from knowledgeable capable masters in that specific field IS in fact the best possible way of doing something. Using the sun revolution theory does not work because most of the scientists who speculated that idea were actually not true scientists but given the rank as an entitlement.
It is great to go against the grain sometimes, I do it regularly, but on a subject like this where it is not only tested but confirmed... that's just foolish.

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

If, what the person is "teaching" goes wholly against the way that 100,000 other pro photographers say, yes we do. If it has an adverse effect on the industry, yes we do. Advise is only good when it is right. Wedding photography is a 50/50 deal, party artistic and part photo-journalistic.

What I was referring to was the title of the thread

[h=2]Shooting RAW is a waste of time[/h]

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

What I was referring to was the title of the thread

Shooting RAW is a waste of time

while I rarely say that someones "style" was stupid or that they were an idiot, telling someone they are wrong when they are "teaching" another person wrong. yeah I will do that all day every day if it helps another photographer become better.

 

[theregsy]

I take most of your points on board but you can tweak white balance in a jpeg as well, I admit you do have a greater latitude with RAW but a Jpeg doesn't have to stay exactly as it was

 

[carguy]

Seems like this discussion hits forums almost weekly. From what I understand, a RAW file contains more image data that can be manipulated during post-processing. Want that option? Shoot RAW. Don't want that option? Don't shoot RAW.

It's futile and juvenile to bash like that, really.

Get out and shoot

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

I take most of your points on board but you can tweak white balance in a jpeg as well, I admit you do have a greater altitude with RAW but a Jpeg doesn't have to stay exactly as it was

Not really in the same ways. In JPG it is more like adding or removing a filter if that makes sense and it is rarely efficient enough. While I hate to link to the luminous landscape website, I think these examples show it the best although is some what extreme examples
White Balance Follies

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

Get out and shoot

ROTFLMAO
Yes sir... :chargrined:
Packing as I type. Leaving for St Pete Beach in the early morning.

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

while I rarely say that someones "style" was stupid or that they were an idiot, telling someone they are wrong when they are "teaching" another person wrong. yeah I will do that all day every day if it helps another photographer become better.

I just think there is a better way of helping someone than calling what they do is wrong or stupid or a waste of time. When you insult someone then it is past the point of teaching.
People come to this site on all different levels and we need to remember that. What some people don't remember is that the critique section is where people ask for criticism and that is the place for it. You can be nice and still give constructive criticism.
My style is different than others. I am not shooting for a paid gig, so My standard is different than the pro shooters. I would never think of saying what anyone is doing is wrong. I may suggest that there might be a better, or more efficient way of doing something. If I see someone shoot something that I really like I will ask them if they will share their methods with me and I will try it and ask for opinions.

All I am saying is we all need to try to be helpful without putting anyone down in the process.

 

[Eduard]

I take most of your points on board but you can tweak white balance in a jpeg as well, I admit you do have a greater latitude with RAW but a Jpeg doesn't have to stay exactly as it was

True but every time you edit and save a JPEG file you always lose quality. There are ways around it (using intermediate files in a lossless format like PNG or TIFF) but JPEG is a bad choice for archival if you think you will edit a file again.

 

[pistnbroke]

quote ...

True but every time you edit and save a JPEG file you always lose quality.

​

But lightroom does not modify files it only stores a data file on what changes are required ...brightness/contrast/crop etc......................????

so you are not saving a changed file .....???

 

[Eduard]

quote ...

True but every time you edit and save a JPEG file you always lose quality.

​

But lightroom does not modify files it only stores a data file on what changes are required ...brightness/contrast/crop etc......................????

so you are not saving a changed file .....???

Absolutely true!! Lightroom does NOT edit files directly! We've come full circle and are back to talking about workflow!! LOL

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

Digital Photography RAW vs JPEG Part 1 - YouTube

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

Raw Vs Jpeg: White Balance Recovery example - YouTube