Wedding: JPEG vs. RAW

[Arch]

No, that is a professional's opinion, one which is totally supported by professional wedding togs over here, I don't know any at all shooting jpeg for critical work.

I respect your opinion, but i don't agree here, as stated i know a few Pro wedding photogs who shoot mainly Jpeg, i think thier work is rather good, but they have been doing it for many years.
Again, look at the similarities from years ago shooting film, you can still edit jpegs and produce good results, not every shot will need major work. In the same way, when film was used, not every shot was taken into the darkroom, dodged, burned etc. People underestimate what modern files can provide.

I don't reckon having a format which deteriorates with every opening to be conducive to good photographic practice and stick with the view that only a lazy pro will shoot in jpeg.

Here you are misinformed, Jpegs do not deteriorate with every opening.


Tbh, the more i read the last staement form the OP, the more this just sounds like the photog just not wanting to part with RAW files.

Him saying 'this photographer has agreed to only giving us JPEGs'... doesn't mean he always shoots weddings in jpeg... and even if he has said that, i think it is more likey that he just wants a reason not to have to hand the RAWs over.

 

[Steve01]

Here is the thing... all the files that I like I have RAW, PSD, and JPEG. 3 different files. What do you guys recommend? Delete RAW and just keep PSD and JPEG? What do you do?

The RAW is the original and has all of the data the camera captured, I keep it.

The PSD is the Edit, I keep that, and that's the largest file if you've done any editing, not the RAW's

You can make JPG's from the PSD if you need to post it or pass it to a friend, I delete them after posting.

Some folks here say it's OK to delete the RAW file after you're done with the editing. Would you throw away your negatives after you printed your images?

Raw is a digital negative, if you ever want to go back and rework an image, you go back to the Raw file, maybe the PSD and definitely not the JPG.

As for opening a JPG in ACR, yes that's what I always do but you can't compare the differences between RAW and JPG editing.
Shoot a RAW and JPG with the wrong white balance setting and see what happens. In Raw you just change it to the right setting or use the slider to pick an exact color temperature, in JPG you use the white balance tool, and play with the sliders until it looks good enough.
Then you probably have to continue in PS with Thresholds & Curves.

As it turns out biostockman's photographer IS shooting RAW and is only willing to give him the JPG's so the whole issue of not hiring him for not shooting RAW went out the window.

I don't know what the standard wedding photographer agreement is but that seems reasonable to me. I wouldn't give away the digital negatives.

 

[Robin Usagani]

JPEGs deteriorates every time you save. Even if you didn't make any change and always save it as the highest jpeg quality, it will deteriorates!

 

[Flash Harry]

"Here you are misinformed, Jpegs do not deteriorate with every opening."

You can qualify this statement? I think it is you who is misinformed, why is it a "lossy" format then, I spent years researching this info before going digital along with college professors during my two years there all saying the same thing, jpegs are useful for web, email etc and have their place within the genre but are most definitely not a great format for demanding photographic situations, Tiff is/would be preferred but as these are space hogs for camera memory RAW offers the best option of capture in 2010 for any "Pro" worth his/her salt.

I also had my own darkroom and every shot chosen from the proofs from the lab were hand printed by me, the proofs went in the trash, THEY WERE NOT MY WORK.

"Tbh, the more i read the last staement form the OP, the more this just sounds like the photog just not wanting to part with RAW files.

Him saying 'this photographer has agreed to only giving us JPEGs'... doesn't mean he always shoots weddings in jpeg... and even if he has said that, i think it is more likey that he just wants a reason not to have to hand the RAWs over."

I'm in total agreement with him here as stated in an earlier post, the OP wouldn't be on my client list as there's no way he'd get files from me unless he was spending a great deal of money, that includes jpeg. That too, is my professional opinion. H

 

[Steve01]

.... RAW images do contain more information and are able to be manipulated more than jpegs in post they are really only necessary for very large prints. If the photographer can get the correct exposure out of the camera jpegs should be fine. If you want to put your alter shot on the side of your house or on a billboard than maybe RAW format is what you need.

That's not really correct.
A 10MP camera shoots a 10MP image, JPG or Raw.
In either format they can only be printed so big before the quality starts to go down.

The RAW file contains all the all the data the camera collected and has a wider dynamic range than the JPG.

When you shoot in JPG you take all that data and let the $2 computer in the camera bake in the white balance, sharpness, tint, saturation, brightness, exposure, and more.

In RAW you get to choose those things yourself.
If the RAW image is perfect as is, it added 1 mouse click to your work-flow.
If not you, not the camera, can make those adjustments in your RAW editor and pass the image with the adjustments to your image editing program.

Also, all of the adjustment you made to the RAW files are saved as data and are non destructive and reversible.

 

[Flash Harry]

^^^ +1

 

[Robin Usagani]

adjustment on JPEG is non destructive also if you save it as other file

 

[Arch]

"Here you are misinformed, Jpegs do not deteriorate with every opening."

You can qualify this statement? I think it is you who is misinformed, why is it a "lossy" format then,

Sure, it is a lossy format because each time the image (as a jpeg) is edited and saved it further compresses the image, often making simliar toned pixels the same tone etc. This deteriorates image quality.
However, non of this happens to an image which is just being opened and closed, you can only get the deterioration after an edit and a save has taken place. Therefore the quality of product given to the customer won't ever degrade.

 

[Flash Harry]

I wouldn't see any point opening and closing an image to not edit do you, I rarely open images just to view unless they belong to someone else, by the time any image of mine gets to a jpeg stage I'm over it, all my editing is via psd layered files which if flattened are saved in tiff format, all lossless, this tells me something, compression/recompression is not the way to go. H

 

[Robin Usagani]

So what is the conclusion? LOL

 

[Flash Harry]

Question My camera uses JPEGS Canon Powershot G5. Images are stunning. Do I need to convert to TIFF for any reason or should I edit and save willy nilly in JPEG format?

Answer

JPEG images are compressed. That means that information has been thrown away during the compression process
That however is not the only way information is thrown away - if you reduce the resolution, or use the lower quality sensors that you find in consumer priced digital cameras, or you use a scanner with 24 rather than 36 bit resolution, you are taking a decision to throw away information.
We just do it rather better in JPEG(!) as the process takes account of how we 'see' pictures. So it is much better, for example, to keep a picture as a JPEG at high resolution, rather than reducing the resolution to get a TIFF image of the same file size.
Save willy nilly - unless you want the very best your camera can do, in which case save it as a TIFF. Just don't mail the TIFFs around....


From Here: Welcome to JPEG

Which for all you experts here is the "Joint Photographic Experts Group" jpeg as we know it

 

[Arch]

Flash, im not sure where your going with this, my comment about Jpegs not lossing data when being opened was made about what you said here...

I don't reckon having a format which deteriorates with every opening to be conducive to good photographic practice and stick with the view that only a lazy pro will shoot in jpeg.

Of course RAW is better than Jpeg for most uses, i have always been an advocate of that on this site, however in defence of jpegs, you can edit them without loosing alot of data, and you certainly won't loose data just by opening them. That is the only point to be made.

 

[Flash Harry]

Flash, im not sure where your going with this, my comment about Jpegs not lossing data when being opened was made about what you said here...

I don't reckon having a format which deteriorates with every opening to be conducive to good photographic practice and stick with the view that only a lazy pro will shoot in jpeg.

Of course RAW is better than Jpeg for most uses, i have always been an advocate of that on this site, however in defence of jpegs, you can edit them without loosing alot of data, and you certainly won't loose data just by opening them. That is the only point to be made.

That's not what the JPEG site says, "DATA IS THROWN AWAY", discarded on every subsequent compression, nothing about editing, just compression/recompression. H

 

[Arch]

Flash, im not sure where your going with this, my comment about Jpegs not lossing data when being opened was made about what you said here...

I don't reckon having a format which deteriorates with every opening to be conducive to good photographic practice and stick with the view that only a lazy pro will shoot in jpeg.

Of course RAW is better than Jpeg for most uses, i have always been an advocate of that on this site, however in defence of jpegs, you can edit them without loosing alot of data, and you certainly won't loose data just by opening them. That is the only point to be made.

That's not what the JPEG site says, "DATA IS THROWN AWAY", discarded on every subsequent compression, nothing about editing, just compression/recompression. H

yes and how do you get compression/recompression?... by re-saving, not by opening/closing.

 

[inov8ter]

You can open jpegs in camera raw. Open bridge, find you jpeg...you can even open tiffs this way as well. Right click on the image, scroll down to "camera raw" and there you go.