Raw or jpeg or both?

ggl27

ggl27

Suspended / Banned
Messages
18
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
No
Hi, I've recently took up photography and was reading into what kind of format to take my pictures in and was wondering what everyone here uses/recommends?

thanks
 
Think you will find that most shoot in RAW to enable full control of the image from a processing point of view, jpeg will give a good general image but there is less to work with for processing.
 
So you would recommend just shooting in raw mode and not raw +jpeg?
 
ggl27 said:
So you would recommend just shooting in raw mode and not raw +jpeg?
Click to expand...

If I was you I'd start in jpeg only mode just to get your eye in for photography. Then you can start shooting RAW+JPEG and have a go at editing the RAW files to see if you like it. If you don't like it then you still have the JPEGS. Once you have a bit of experience with both you can then decide if you want to keep shooting RAW +JPEG or RAW only.
 
Ok thanks, I might change to raw+jpeg on my next day out and see how it goes from there, had my camera for over a month now and have been using jpeg only and now im starting to get into the editing side and read raw are better for editing but im going to keep a jpeg file on my next trip too just to be on the safe side.

Thank you.
 
ggl27 said:
Ok thanks, I might change to raw+jpeg on my next day out and see how it goes from there, had my camera for over a month now and have been using jpeg only and now im starting to get into the editing side and read raw are better for editing but im going to keep a jpeg file on my next trip too just to be on the safe side.

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Raw editing is more like 'developing' than editing a JPEG. RAW files are just that, the raw information needed to make a photograph. It is surprising what happens to the RAW file in camera to make a JPEG. You will be adjusting the exposure, the colours, sharpening, noise reduction etc to just make the picture look like a nice picture and as you get more experience with it it really opens up the possibilities and you get a picture that is exactly how you imagined it rather than how the camera imagined it. The only major downside is you will be doing this for every single picture and it does really slow you down. However, this is only really a problem for professional photographers who need to have a short workflow. For amateurs, enthusiasts and pro photographers who don't need to rush it is definitely the better option.

Definitely get used to the JPEGs and the RAW editing before deciding not to shoot JPEGs all together.

ff you want a bit more info on RAW then this post is really good: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=210392

There are also other great tutorials and guides in this thread: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=253312

Cheers,
Asa
 
I started off shooting in RAW+JPG but when I was running low on space on my SD card one day, switched it to JPG only (and forgot to switch back to RAW+JPG). As you can imagine, I was gutted when I took a (what I thought anyway!) was a great shot and wanted to do some post processing - only to find I didn't have the RAW file for it :(

Won't make that mistake again! ;)
 
I used to shoot in jpeg, moved to jpeg and raw and now I just use raw.

As I am still learning I find that I can do lot of corrections with raw than jpeg which is why I just shoot in raw.
Do you have any software to edit raw? If you do I would say go with raw. You might have to invest in a decent monitor and also calibrate it.
 
Raw isn't the answer to every question.

If you want to spend time processing images yourself afterwards (you will need software to do it in - either the proprietary one supplied with the camera, or Lightroom, Photoshop, etc), then raw files give you more flexibility. You can edit jpegs (but never the original - always create a copy) you just have less information to play with.

However, if you are happy with just taking a photo and then putting it on the web or printing it out, and never touching it again, then jpeg is more than adequate.
 
It depends a lot on what you're shooting. For sport, I tend to use .jpg as I don't want to have to convert bucket loads of images. However, for portraits or one-offs I may well use RAW. There's no right or wrong, just what is right for you at that moment. Can't see any point in shooting both, just eats up memory.
 
Shoot j-peg here, suit me and the type of photos I shoot,I spend time on learning what my camera can do,and set them up to suit me. :)
 
I shoot mostly in Jpeg's depending on what I'm shooting. If it's an airshow or similar and I'm likely to take 2-3,000 photos and don't want to process them all it's Jpeg all the time. However, if it's a critical shot such as a portrait or some wedding shots I'll take it in RAW to make sure I get it perfect.
 
I started out with jpeg, then raw and jpeg - but I still edited the jpegs and had the raw files just in case I needed them. Then I started editing from the raw files last year and never touched the jpegs so now shoot raw only.

I use Lightroom so its easy enough to edit one or two then apply that editing to a set and tweak each image as required.

I accidentally switched to jpeg a few weeks ago and when I came to edit it was so frustrating as I felt like I was having to undo and redo editing (if that makes sense), instead of starting from the raw image.

But it all depends on what you need to do with the images, what software you use and how much time you want to spend editing.

I'd recommend shooting raw + jpeg til you get used to processing raw files.
 
I would shoot both RAW & JPEG till you feel comfortable. Jpeg has the advantage of "being there" so you can show your pictures on almost anything not all devices even recognise RAW
 
I'm more than happy with jpeg, just can't be bothered with all the time it takes editing with raw.
 
As long as your software manages RAW easily then it doesn't make a lot of difference.

I auto load my images into iPhoto on Apple. iPhoto handles the RAW files directly and I tend to always make subtle alterations to any images I take (JPEG or RAW) so may as well take RAW for those times when the alterations are less subtle such as rescuing highlights.
Also, depending on how your camera creates the JPEG you may or may not prefer the RAW files.
 
If you use View NX2 (which probably came with your camera, if not it is a free download from Nikon) you can shoot raw and View NX2 will read all the camera settings, such as increased contrast, sharpness etc. and apply them as adjustments to the raw file. You can then either save as a JPEG without any other editing (if you are happy with the result straight from the camera) or use View NX2 to edit the raw file.
 
ggl27 said:
So you would recommend just shooting in raw mode and not raw +jpeg?
Click to expand...

If you have the option of RAW + jpeg then that's fine ... best of both worlds, personally I only use RAW + RAW to 2nd card or possible overflow.
 
I am just starting out with image processing and not that long into photography, but from the start I am shooting RAW+jpeg, in the future I will probably like to go over my older pictures when I am more proficient with image processing, in the meantime I can use my jpegs for internet or printing.
Memory cards are cheap and current computers have huge hard drives, so storage shouldn't be a problem. Need good organization on the other hand.
 
Raw+Jpeg is, for many cameras, a waste of memory card space. Most raw files contain an embedded jpeg, which is often full-size. Using a bit of software like Instant Jpeg from Raw allows you to extract this embedded jpeg to give an image identical to that which the camera would have produced.
 
I shot in Raw + Jpeg, always have...never been tight for space, as I carry around GB's worth of CF cards...

When I finally get my hands on my 5D3, I'll be sending jeps to the SD and Raw to the CF..already have 3 Sandisk Extreme SD cards ready to roll...
 
I also generally shoot RAW + JPEG for most stuff.

I do have the feeling that shooting JPEG actually is a good learning tool, since it's far less flexible in what you can Post Process, it forces you to concentrate more on exposure and metering in general (IMO)..

However, I shoot RAW + JPEG since I will quickly review and keep the JPEG for most shots, but the odd shot I may want to print or do something special with, and that's when RAW comes in to it's own, the ability to play for exposure/contrast etc goes up massively with RAW..

For casual stuff, I usually delete the RAW's that aren't used.. so keeping storage space more efficiently used.. For important events however, I do tend to hang on to a few more RAWs these days, just in case..
 
When you need to ask this question, the answer is shoot RAW+Jpeg.

Each file has benefits aswell as limitations. As you gain experience and progress with your photography you will then know what format suits for each particular 'shoot'.

Sports guy will likely shout Jpeg, landscape guys likely say RAW - everybody else favouring one or other.

Buy a decent sized memory card too - don't let a small card limit the shoot or camera potential and letting this become the limiting factor for the sake of an additional £20-40 is just crazy.
 
Raw not RAW.

I shoot only raw. But as a good point by Matt on here, he shoots raw and small jpeg so he can go through the jpegs and not the raw files. Very good idea and the only reason I'd do the same. However I'm lucky enough to have a powerful enough computer to not need this.
 
Dexy101 said:
Raw not RAW.

I shoot only raw. But as a good point by Matt on here, he shoots raw and small jpeg so he can go through the jpegs and not the raw files. Very good idea and the only reason I'd do the same.
Click to expand...

Or you could shoot raw only and go through them using FastStone or Irfanview, which use the embedded jpeg for fast viewing.
 
Dexy101 said:
Raw not RAW.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, but both Canon and Nikon say RAW not raw. As do Microsoft and OpenRAW (links are illustrative).

I still cringe when people use 'font' when referring to a 'typeface' - but almost everyone does it and most people (that I have discussed it with) don't know the difference (or have not even heard of typeface) - but they do tend to be 'young 'uns'. :'(
 
I have capture NX2 and lightroom 4 so I do have the software for editing raw files, I currently have 2 x 8Gb memory cards tho considering buying 2 X16GB cards as they are on offer on a website, so may purchase them too as they are only £12 each, ill have a go at raw + jpeg on my next outing and then I can see from there where I go.

Thank you very much for the replies
 
simonblue said:
Which raw files allow this ? :)
Click to expand...

As far as I know all raw file formats include the embedded jpeg (it's what's used for the image preview in the camera). Not all cameras include a full-size jpeg, some will have a smaller image.

I would suggest that anybody thinking of shooting raw+jpeg should download IJFR and give it a try. It's fast and has useful options (do a batch extraction oj jpegs into a sub-folder for example).
 
hollis_f said:
As far as I know all raw file formats include the embedded jpeg (it's what's used for the image preview in the camera). Not all cameras include a full-size jpeg, some will have a smaller image.

I would suggest that anybody thinking of shooting raw+jpeg should download IJFR and give it a try. It's fast and has useful options (do a batch extraction oj jpegs into a sub-folder for example).
Click to expand...

Thanks :thumbs:
 
use both, then compare your raw editing with jpeg, then decide
 
I always shoot RAW.

Sometimes I will shoot RAW to CF + Small JPEG to a separate SD card, if say the client is on location or I think that there might be some use in displaying it immediately, say to download onto an iPad.

I made a schoolboy error the other day. I forgot to reset my camera to RAW after I had been testing something and then went into a client shoot forgetting to set it back to RAW.

I had a group shoot of 20 people which went fine. Except for the fact that 3 delegates were very late and missed the shoot. (Trying to herd CEO's is like trying to nail jelly to a wall!). Anyway, this is normally no problem at all, I just photograph the stragglers afterwards in the same area and them photoshop them in the group.

This easily done in RAW since even if the light changes in the interval, you can easily alter the colour temperature to match the original. Highlights are also much easier to recover in RAW and you can get more detail from the darks too. In JPEG shooting - this can become a nightmare!

It took me 10 times longer to get the balance correct and photoshop them in. Always shoot RAW. Always. Unless you're taking snappy snapps for newspapers and paparazzi style stuff - then speed is critical, JPEGS can be useful here. (Along side RAW)

What with memory being so cheap these days <£50 32GB's - there's no reason not to. Lots of benefits and no downsides. Just my 2pence worth :)

Good luck with the snapping, just keep at it.
 
pepper1786 said:
use both, then compare your raw editing with jpeg, then decide
Click to expand...

Agree. You really need to do this. I always used a Sony A700 in Raw but tried a JPEG comparison last week and hated the JPEG. Colours, exposure and detail were all noticeably different. I actually preferred the untouched Raw file a lot.

My decision is made even easier by using iPhoto where the Raw files gets loaded and stored and are very easy to edit with no other software required.
 
ggl27 said:
I have capture NX2 and lightroom 4 so I do have the software for editing raw files, I currently have 2 x 8Gb memory cards tho considering buying 2 X16GB cards as they are on offer on a website, so may purchase them too as they are only £12 each, ill have a go at raw + jpeg on my next outing and then I can see from there where I go.

Thank you very much for the replies
Click to expand...

As you have Capture NX2 look at my earlier reply and substitute Capture NX2 for View NX2.

Suvv said:
If you use View NX2 (which probably came with your camera, if not it is a free download from Nikon) you can shoot raw and View NX2 will read all the camera settings, such as increased contrast, sharpness etc. and apply them as adjustments to the raw file. You can then either save as a JPEG without any other editing (if you are happy with the result straight from the camera) or use View NX2 to edit the raw file.
Click to expand...

There is no need to shoot raw and JPEG as Capture NX2 can produce a modified JPEG from the NEF file using all the camera settings when converting the NEF to JPEG. You can edit the NEF if you wish with Capture NX2 and set it up so that it opens as a TIFF in lightroom4 if you want.
 
thank you very much for all the replies, will take information from them all
 
I mainly shoot in jpeg but I'm probably going to move to raw + jpeg soon. Jpegs straight out the camera are convenient but a shot that's slightly off can be easierly fixed in raw
 
What with memory being so cheap these days <£50 32GB's - there's no reason not to. Lots of benefits and no downsides. Just my 2pence worth
Click to expand...

+1 I totally agree.

I think if your computer can handle the larger files, you have a larger card as above and you have the time and inclination then I'd go RAW.

I use 2x16gb cards in my D7000, and when I originally got it I set it to record jpeg on one, RAW on the other. After a while I realised I never used the jpegs, any image I used I always processed from RAW, even if the original jpeg was acceptable I always preferred the processed RAW file as it gives more control over the final image.

I can see the advantages of shooting jpegs for some people and situations, but I prefer RAW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top