Woah.

It tosses the colours outside of the sRGB gamut, for one. That's a whole lot of information lost (makes recoving detail from over-saturated colours pretty much impossible *sigh*... I hate the colour red...and it's my favourite colour). It also combines the information recieved on each pixel of the sensor into one RGB value, in which, again, you lose data (or at least that's how I understand it). And then there's that an 8-bit JPEG only stores a small portion of the sensor's dynamic range (which is usually around 14-bits now).
 
JPG Fine at 12.2 MP.
You don't shoot in RAW?

I'm sure JPG is fine for the OP, its smaller, so if you are doing a burst you get more pictures, recovery time between pictures is faster, you can save more to your card, and copying the files to your computer is faster. Unless you're doing professional work odds are JPG is just fine.
 
It's worth noting that it's a really bad idea to store photos on your memory card-- offload them to a computer after each shoot.
 
It's worth noting that it's a really bad idea to store photos on your memory card-- offload them to a computer after each shoot.


I was wondering about the same thing. At first, I ask myself why didn't OP just format the memory card .... and later on ..... oh ... ..
 
It's also not a good idea to delete images in the camera (corrupted files), only once uploaded to your computer.

Each image file is a slightly different size, dependent on the scene captured. The camera doesn't erase anything, it just changes the flags in the header for that memory location, and overwrites the original image with new data.
 
Last edited:
I shoot JPG fine as well, and it suits my needs just fine. RAW I just don't need. My photos come out great (for my liking) and I do NO post-processing.

Flame me if you will, but if you take the shot right you don't need RAW.

:)
 
I dont store them on my card, I download copies of the ones I like onto my flash drive. Then, once the card gets pretty full, I delete most of the ones I can spare. I have another 6GB HC HD SD (woah, dislexic monster happened there.) that I can use after this one. I like to keep some photos on my card so that I can show the family when they ask to see them, and I dont have anywhere for my flash drive to put in. With the D90, the files are so big, if I were to download them all to the computer, Id never be able to use it. Itd be incredibly slow.

Mark
 
Why is that?

Mark
JPEG is a lossy compression method, which removes information from the image to make image files smaller.
As MusicaleCA mentioned, most DSLR cameras capture in 12-bit color depth (Nikon) or 14-bit color depth (newer Canon) in RAW mode, while JPEG only retains 8-bits of color depth.

It gets worse, because a committee of camera engineers decided how much sharpening, saturation, and other effects would automatically be applied to every JPEG capture your camera makes.

All your images have already been post processed, and you had no input on that processing. That's what you see when you look at them on your LCD. An image in a print format, not a format like a film negative that will require further processing.

Capturing images as RAW files gives you more control in post processing. In fact all RAW images need post processing to one degree or another.

RAW converters leave RAW image files in a 16-bit color depth. When you do post processing you have all the pixel info to work with.

If you post process a JPEG you only have 1/3 the pixel data to work with.

Plus, each time you save a JPEG it throws away a little more pixel data. You won't notice anything amiss with a JPEG fine image saved at maximum quality till you hit 10 or so saves. Exactly how many depends on the image itself.

For output to the web your image has to be JPEG anyway. Many print labs will accept images files as TIFF's which is another image format that retains all the pixel data. RAW image data can't be printed or displayed on the web.

As it turns out a print made from a JPEG fine uploaded at maximum quality will be visually indistinguishable from a TIFF file that is 4 times larger, as long as that JPEG has only been saved a handful of times.

The bottom line is, JPEG makes DSLR photography pretty much the same as having an interchangeable lens, no shutter lag, feature rich P&S camera. Shooting RAW is like taking film and processing it in a dark room so the image turns out exactly the way you want it.

So, you bought a 12.2 MP, $1000 camera, and never see 8 MP the image sensor detected, because you record your images as JPEGs.

For more information on the JPEG image format visit www.wikipedia.org and type "JPEG" in the search box. After perusing the JPEG page, type "RAW Image Format" into the search box and investigate the advantages/disadvantages of recording your images as RAW data.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure JPG is fine for the OP, its smaller, so if you are doing a burst you get more pictures, recovery time between pictures is faster, you can save more to your card, and copying the files to your computer is faster. Unless you're doing professional work odds are JPG is just fine.
I'm not a professional photographer (only a hobbyist shooting since December 2007) but I only shoot in RAW because the JPEG images that came out of my XTi just didn't look that good. The more experienced photographers that I hang out with suggested that I start shooting in RAW and then compare the RAW to JPEG conversions to the JPEGs straight from the camera. After seeing that the RAW to JPEG conversions had better clarity, more detail, better color and were sharper than the JPEGs straight from the camera, I set the XTi to RAW and never shot in JPEG again.

I haven't tried shooting in JPEG with my 40D or 5D so I really don't know how well the JPEGs would turn out and don't really feel I need to find out. I'm used to the workflow for RAW and don't mind PPing my keepers.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top