raw v Jpeg

who shoots in what

  • raw

    Votes: 125 56.1%

  • Jpeg

    Votes: 33 14.8%

  • both at times

    Votes: 59 26.5%

  • I don't care I'd rather be watching the tele

    Votes: 6 2.7%
  • Total voters
    223
Cobra

Cobra

In Memoriam. TPer Emeritus
Admin
Messages
114,434
Name
The real Chris
Edit My Images
No
Ok there have been a few threads about this recently
Lets see if we can get a fair assessment of who shoots what
 
You can create a poll you know :D

I shoot RAW all the time...except when I used to shoot in studio, as I controlled everything in the image and therefore saved time and storage space :)
 
I shoot both using the Raw and jpg setting, but when on holiday coz I know I'll shoot a lot, or taking family snaps I just shoot jpg
 
If it's a landscape or something i know will look better with some pp then raw.
If it motorsports, etc where im taking hundreds of shots i take the time to meter, white balance, etc and shoot jpeg.
 
raw all the way
why throw away detail/control that you might just need?
 
Raw all the time now. Once you've switched you'll never go back :lol:
 
mmcp42 said:
raw all the way
why throw away detail/control that you might just need?
Click to expand...

Yes but if you open Jpeg in "camera raw"
you have the same control as you would in raw
I shoot predominately Jpeg, have shot very occasionally in raw
and can't see a difference when comparing the "finished" images
So a far as I am concerned the exta storage raw takes up over Jpeg
isn't worth the pixels its written on

(That should be good for a few arguments :D )

 
mmcp42 said:
raw all the way
why throw away detail/control that you might just need?
Click to expand...

If you 'need' more control in the studio you're doing something wrong - there is no more 'detail' either in any normal output you'd care to mention/sell :)

DD
 
mmcp42 said:
raw all the way
why throw away detail/control that you might just need?
Click to expand...

I agree, I've only recently started to shoot in raw but the amount of detail I can pull back in amazing, nothing like using a jpeg. Also if I make an error with exposure or white balance I can easily correct it. Only downside it the extra time it takes to process the images and storage space needed.
 
CSB said:
Also if I make an error with exposure or white balance I can easily correct it. Only downside it the extra time it takes to process the images and storage space needed.
Click to expand...

As above white balance is correctable in camera raw with a jpeg file
( I would assume that other editing programmes will also do this?)
 
Jpeg for me - but mainly because I havn't worked up the enthusism to delve into the world of raw yet. I'll give it a try one day...
 
From Cambridge in Colour.

So which is better: raw or JPEG? There is no single answer, as this depends on the type of photography you are doing. In most cases, raw files will provide the best solution due to their technical advantages and the decreasing cost of large memory cards. raw files give the photographer far more control, but with this comes the trade-off of speed, storage space and ease of use. The raw trade-off is sometimes not worth it for sports and press photographers, although landscape and most fine art photographers often choose RAW in order to maximize the image quality potential of their digital camera.
Click to expand...

Personally I shot JPegs because I mainly shoot motorsport and aircraft, not printing massive images, happy with the A3 and A2 prints I get with JPegs.

I can see the advantages of shooting RAW, especially for city or landscapes, you just need to have a good work flow for processing your images and a more indepth understanding of what settings are required.

Peter
 
I shoot both, mainly because I'm still not that good at processing my RAW shots and I tend to use the jpegs as a minimum quality reference.
 
I shoot raw because I don't like the way my D60 blows the colours, for some reason Lightroom seems to do it much better. Also, for a novice like me, being able to claw back detail is good too :D
 
I use both jpeg for ease of uploading the RAW as a digital negative and also as my PP improves I can go back and redo any image in a new way. Storage is dealt with by backing up onto DVD.
 
Mainly RAW, but when I shoot things that are not all that important and are more "snaps" that photo's its jpeg.
 
mainly jpeg, occasionally raw, to be honest I don't really care, just as long as I get the shot :)
 
RAW whenever I can, although with my P&S and Bridge that's not an option..
 
combat squirrel said:
Curious, may I ask why ? :) Still learning, so keen to understand why this is so ! lol
Click to expand...

I'd guess that in the studio you control all aspects of the lighting, the time and taking the shot so there's no excuse for getting it wrong.
 
RAW only for me. :)

You may be able to apparently alter the white balance on a Jpeg with Adobe Camera Raw, but you are altering the pixels, which depending on how big a change you make, should give more degradation to the image.

You may also be able to move the Exposure slider, but in a Jpeg, once the information is overexposed it is gone, probably forever. With RAW there may be a little bit of information to recover if an image has overexposed.

Dealing with Jpeg, you are dealing a compressed image which has had information removed. Depending on what and how big you decide to print, may or may not me a problem.

People talk of the extra work involved with RAW, but as with any image, you just do the work on the images that need work, whether that be a RAW or Jpeg file. Yes, if a Jpeg needs nothing done to it, it is ready to print. With RAW you will have to save to a Jpeg. But if it is a lot of files you can do a batch convert. You do however, also get the option to save as a Tiff file, should you wish to print big and get the maximum detail from your file.

Each to there own though. :shrug: :lol:
 
I've got question to those who shoot RAW+JPG. What's the benefit of it, how do you use jpg files later on. I see it here two main disadvantages. Firstly, you loose extra space on card and secondly it takes longer to save files on card.
 
redhed17 said:
RAW only for me. :)

, but in a Jpeg, once the information is overexposed it is gone, probably forever. With RAW there may be a little bit of information to recover if an image has overexposed.

Each to there own though. :shrug: :lol:
Click to expand...

Not convinced sorry

Highlights are recoverable with Jpeg
as well as raw
as long as there is still some "hidden detail"
If its "blown" its "blown"
whether raw or Jpeg you're still screwed :D
 
combat squirrel said:
Curious, may I ask why ? :) Still learning, so keen to understand why this is so ! lol
Click to expand...

As dod said really:thumbs:

raw's greatest advantage is in being able to recover mistakes with exposure & white balance - if, as in a very controlled environment such as a studio, you don't make those mistakes you don't need that extra latitude

As an example - I sell high quality prints up to A2 (I'd sell them bigger but no-one has asked), as a white-background studio, those jpegs may be as little as 1mb of info on the subject at capture as half of the image has no info being pure white, whereas the raw file (which offers no advantage) is just short of 20mb regardless. When I shoot 1,000 images a day, that's a huge difference in storage and speed of processing

When I'm out & about shooting anything else I always shoot raw for the higher dynamic range and options for corrections later - just in case

:)

DD
 
robsohn said:
I've got question to those who shoot RAW+JPG. What's the benefit of it, how do you use jpg files later on. I see it here two main disadvantages. Firstly, you loose extra space on card and secondly it takes longer to save files on card.
Click to expand...

I use the camera jpgs for quick viewing on a laptop to assess them, and just generally peruse. Eventually I produce jpgs from the raws (or DNGs actually in my case), and delete the original jpgs.

Space on the card isn't an issue. I have plenty of cards. Time taken to save to the card isn't an issue either. I don't shoot multiple burst sequences.
 
Cobra said:
Not convinced sorry

Highlights are recoverable with Jpeg
as well as raw
as long as there is still some "hidden detail"
If its "blown" its "blown"
whether raw or Jpeg you're still screwed :D
Click to expand...

jpeg is technically described as a 'lossy' compression technique - that is to say, information is discarded as part of the compression process. By definition, a raw file will retain more information than a jpeg.

The other key difference is the jpeg image has already been processed by your camera; thus if you have any picture style setting, or in camera sharpening enabled, this will have been applied to the image before it is saved, and this can not be reversed. You can of course turn these settings off in the whole, but some, white balance for example, can not. So again, a raw file will have more 'virgin' information in the file, where as the jpeg will have processes information.

Finally, repeatedly editing a jpeg file and saving it will compound the information loss and can degrade the image. The same is not true of raw.

On the other hand, raw files are much larger, and do require a degree of PP just to get a decent result. Sometimes, it's just not worth the additional space or effort as jpegs are pretty good now-a-days...

Personally, I use both formats from time to time, depending upon what I'm shooting and what I want to do with the images. I've set up my main camera to write RAW to the CF card and jpeg to the SD card as default, so best of both worlds.
 
Cobra said:
Not convinced sorry

Highlights are recoverable with Jpeg
as well as raw
as long as there is still some "hidden detail"
If its "blown" its "blown"
whether raw or Jpeg you're still screwed :D
Click to expand...

I'm going to disagree with you on this one Chris. Yes, you can recover highlights with jpeg as well as raw if you use ACR, but with raw you can recover much more as a certain amount is already lost when the jpeg is created.

In any case, I don't see raw as a way of correcting mistakes. If I shoot jpeg, the camera interprets waht the image should look like. If I shoot raw, I determine what the image looks like and I honestly prefer my version to the camera's.
 
Does 'both at times' mean you use the raw + jpeg option, or that sometimes you shoot raw, and sometimes jpeg?
 
MisterE said:
I use the camera jpgs for quick viewing on a laptop to assess them, and just generally peruse. Eventually I produce jpgs from the raws (or DNGs actually in my case), and delete the original jpgs.

Space on the card isn't an issue. I have plenty of cards. Time taken to save to the card isn't an issue either. I don't shoot multiple burst sequences.
Click to expand...

cheers MisterE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top