Would you be surprised if i told you

I'm lucky in that although I might shoot a lot of images on a job, I only need to produce a handful for the end-user - maybe as few as three or four.
Also the time-frame between jobs allows plenty of time for P&P...and coffee breaks...

But if I needed to produce more, I can still apply a saved series of pre-sets to a batch of RAW images in the same way that I could do with JPEGs, so it wouldn't take much longer.
 
It's hard to be surprised by Rouse once you know his personality. He was an early inspiration to me and i really respect his field craft and compositions, but i don't trust his technical advice or post-processing skills as far as i can throw him.
And as Arkady said, the less said about his personality the better. He's really shocked me in that regard on a number of occasions.

pragmatist said:
Andy Rouse shoots mostly in Jpeg?
Click to expand...
 
why would that be a problem anyway?
 
He also stated that most of his sales these days comes from Landscapes as opposed to Wildlife. I agree with Arkady's comments though, My other half was not very impressed with him, Thought he was arrogant. I don't mind Andy but i could see where she was coming from.
 
G2EWS said:
I have a friend who is on this forum and is a professional photographer. He always shoots JPEG's. The work flow does not allow him time to process a RAW image, but he seems to get it right everytime anyway. Having been a press photographer and now has a portrait business he should get it right I guess.

I agree with Arkady that not shooting in RAW seems a bit daft when you are throwing away so much information that could be used in the image.

Me I would never shoot anything but RAW. I used to shoot RAW and JPEG, but realised that it was only giving me more grief and doubling the quantity of pictures I had on the hard drive. The original idea was to be able to view the JPEG's on any other computer without installing something like photoshop, but now there are so many software packages such as Breeze Browser that allow you to view a RAW image that there is no requirement in my life for JPEG's.

Regards

Chris
Click to expand...

I am the pro Chris refers to. You have to realise that a pro photographer is really a businessman whose product is photography. I know all about shooting raw and if I was shooting commercial - and I used to on Sinar P2 5"x4" film cameras) I would shoot raw. But until I get a portrait or wedding customer spends less or be any less delighted than over the moon with what I do for them I will continue shooting jpg because it works.

Experienced Professional photographers focus on the very best product in the shortest time possible, allowing him to free up time to sell more.

stew
 
artona said:
until I get a portrait or wedding customer spends less or be any less delighted than over the moon with what I do for them I will continue shooting jpg because it works.

Experienced Professional photographers focus on the very best product in the shortest time possible, allowing him to free up time to sell more.
Click to expand...


Bang on the money! :thumbs:

I spent 2 days shooting about 100 kids at a nursery last week. The biggest prints ordered will be A3, the majority will be more like 7x5. I am able to light a set, set an accurate wb and expose accurately. Why would I shoot raw? and when would I process, bearing in mind I have other shoots booked throughout the rest of the week/weekend? As it is I was at the studio till 10pm last night...


I reckon the majority of togs would be hard pushed to tell a good quality finished jpeg from an image created as a raw file.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top