Wedding: JPEG vs. RAW

[biostockman]

Hi All! This is my first post of many more to come, hopefully... I'm an amateur DSLR photographer but this question is actually about my wedding photographer. He shoots with a Canon 5D Mark II, but he only shoots in JPEG format and not RAW... This is seems odd to me but perhaps its because I only have a lowly 450D and his resolution is almost twice that of mine. However, I'm a bit concerned. I had planned on editing the photos myself but don't know how much I can edit JPEG images from this camera... Any thoughts? Would JPEG images be sufficient or should we insist on RAW?

Thanks in advance for any and all replies!!

 

[Robin Usagani]

WTH? You should fire that photographer right now! Seriously!

 

[biostockman]

WTH? You should fire that photographer right now! Seriously!

Well, luckily we haven't retained him, yet... So I'm guessing your opinion is the same as mine, regardless of the camera he should be shooting RAW images?

BTW - Thanks for the reply!

 

[Robin Usagani]

Even if he agrees that he will shoot with RAW, I would still look for another photographer. He probably does not know how to do post processing. Kinda hard to adjust your WB all the time at weddings so more than likely the WB will be off. KInda hard to fix the WB with only JPEG!

 

[Steve01]

Would JPEG images be sufficient or should we insist on RAW?

No I don't think JPG's would be sufficient.

There's no reason he shouldn't be shooting in RAW.
If it were me, I'd find someone else.

 

[Mike_E]

Have you seen his work?
He may actually be good enough to not need to shoot RAW. Not everyone does you know.




P.S. It's easy to correct WB in .jpeg. Look around, the info is out there.

It's even been described on this site if you want to use the search function.

 

[Robin Usagani]

If you think changing color sliders left and right is easy.. i guess. I rather user 1 slider (temperature).

 

[Moe]

A couple possibilities pop into my head:

1. He's so good, he only needs JPEG. Definitely not unheard of. Getting it right in camera would speed up his workflow.

2. You misunderstood him. Perhaps he meant that he would give you the photos in JPEG, but not RAW. Especially if he knows you have the intent on editing them yourself (which I find fairly odd).

Surely you have seen his work. How is it? I'm not just talking about a flash website with 50 great photos on it. Perhaps he's taken thousands of crappy photos and 50 great ones and those are the ones he puts on the site. I've heard of people getting hosed by that. The best is if your potential photographer has a blog where they display quite a few shots from each session, be it portraits or weddings, etc. That way you can see their consistency.

 

[biostockman]

A couple possibilities pop into my head:

1. He's so good, he only needs JPEG. Definitely not unheard of. Getting it right in camera would speed up his workflow.

2. You misunderstood him. Perhaps he meant that he would give you the photos in JPEG, but not RAW. Especially if he knows you have the intent on editing them yourself (which I find fairly odd).

Surely you have seen his work. How is it? I'm not just talking about a flash website with 50 great photos on it. Perhaps he's taken thousands of crappy photos and 50 great ones and those are the ones he puts on the site. I've heard of people getting hosed by that. The best is if your potential photographer has a blog where they display quite a few shots from each session, be it portraits or weddings, etc. That way you can see their consistency.

Hi Moe,

Thanks for responding!

1). He actually told us that he shoots primarily JPEG and hardly ever shoots RAW. I found this very odd myself.

2). Yes, he did bring about 20+ 8x10's and they were all terrific shots, the guy does have a great eye.

I'm feeling really iffy about this guy.

 

[tsblo]

WTH? You should fire that photographer right now! Seriously!

I've shot weddings for a few years now. I shoot mainly JPEG. I take the time to get it right in camera the first time. Most professionals I know do the same. The only time I use raw is when I need a failsafe if I am in mixed lighting or am having issues with exposure but its very seldom

You most definitely should not fire your photographer because they shoot JPEG. I would use it more as a sign your photographer probably knows what they are doing and does not have to resort to adjusting the file in photo software.

I was taught in college that raw is a tool, there is a time and place to use it. You wouldn't use a screw driver to hammer in a nail would you?

Oh and to the OP's notion of editing the photos yourself, I know I edit all my work prior to delivering it to the client, and in the contract they sign there is a clause that it is not to be edited. I know many professionals work the same way. When your name is attached to something you may not want someone else editing work that represents your style and flair. I'd say enjoy your wedding day, and leave the photography, editing and all, to the professional. If you don't think they will process in a way you like, find another professional who will.

 

[biostockman]

WTH? You should fire that photographer right now! Seriously!

I've shot weddings for a few years now. I shoot mainly JPEG. I take the time to get it right in camera the first time. Most professionals I know do the same. The only time I use raw is when I need a failsafe if I am in mixed lighting or am having issues with exposure but its very seldom

You most definitely should not fire your photographer because they shoot JPEG. I would use it more as a sign your photographer probably knows what they are doing and does not have to resort to adjusting the file in photo software.

I was taught in college that raw is a tool, there is a time and place to use it. You wouldn't use a screw driver to hammer in a nail would you?

Oh and to the OP's notion of editing the photos yourself, I know I edit all my work prior to delivering it to the client, and in the contract they sign there is a clause that it is not to be edited. I know many professionals work the same way. When your name is attached to something you may not want someone else editing work that represents your style and flair. I'd say enjoy your wedding day, and leave the photography, editing and all, to the professional. If you don't think they will process in a way you like, find another professional who will.

This is certainly true as well.. Perhaps as an amateur I'm not yet at the level where I'm confident enough in my abilities to shoot only JPEG.

 

[Idahophoto]

The only time you should shoot in JPEG is if you don't care about the photo's so yeah I would completely agree with the first post. Fire that photographer as I assume you do care for those pictures, even if he obviously does not.

 

[Moe]

I'm really surprised that people would fire him based solely on the fact he doesn't shoot RAW. I don't know anything about you guys, but that is a very amateurish statement to make with no other info on the guy. Maybe some people only shoot JPEG when they don't care about the photos, but this guy may shoot JPEG because he's that good. It says to me that you guys know some, but maybe not enough...

 

[Robin Usagani]

Then shoot RAW+jpeg. I am sorry, I just think you shouldn't let the camera process the photos for you.

 

[Sam6644]

I almost never shoot raw anymore. If I'm shooting something that will send me home with a lot of photos (more than 30 or so) I only shoot jpg... and if I know it's not going to be printed large or cropped much I only shoot jpg medium. I BARELY ever shoot raw large.. usually when I do shoot raw, it's only raw medium (which is still 10mp).

nobody NEEDS to shoot raw. Raw gives you a lot of flexibility, but if you don't think you need it in post, what's the point of adding steps to your workflow?