JPEG or RAW?

[skieur]

If you don't have these visual and editing skills yet, then I would doubt that there is much advantage to using RAW.

Fair enough. But if you're improving as a photographer, and you intend to improve further still in the future, then I'd predict there will come a day when you'll finally "get it". At that point, you'll start looking back over all those photos you've taken and wish you had RAW files for them.

One of the reasons I shoot RAW is that I can't go back and re-shoot some stuff, but I sure can go back and re-process photos.

The point however is that some experienced photographers have NO reason to go back and re-process photos. Moreover if you are shooting public relations or journalistic work, then getting the shot...speed...smaller files are more important and those smaller files are jpeg. If you are good at what you do, then major editing corrections should not be necessary. If you are super picky, then you can still edit in 16 bit and/or use software filters to adjust colour and detail without losing quality.

RAW is just a tool or additional feature to be be used when appropriate, but it is certainly not the answer for all shooting.

 

[hamlet]

One thing that I never see get mentioned when a noob to RAW asks this question--perhaps because it is assumed to be self-evident by those with experience--is that until you actually learn how to process a RAW file (rather than just blindly moving sliders around), you're not necessarily going to see any benefit. In fact, you might see results that look crappier than the JPEG made by the camera.

I remember it took me a while to get it. To be honest, I almost gave up on RAW entirely because I didn't see it to be worth all the extra effort. Then, I went on a trip and captured some difficult shots during a storm that would be impossible to go back and recapture, but unfortunately the shots had slight exposure and color cast issues. I had a real "A-HA!" moment when I put my mind to working on those particular RAW files because I was staggered at how much better they looked than the camera JPEGs. Absolutely no comparison in that instance. I became a believer in RAW, but still, there are lots of situations where I end up just deleting the RAW files and going with the camera JPEGs because they look fine.

To be clear, I'm not discouraging use of raw simply because somebody is inexperienced with it. The great thing is, once you get to be good at it, you reserve the option to go back and re-process your old work if you want, because raw editing is non-destructive.

I love the fact that i can always go back to zero and start completely from the original image in raw. Now when future Hamlet receives my raw images, his accumulated experience can edit my raw files properly. No regrets.

 

[robbins.photo]

I am almost ready for my grand photojourney trip across many lands with first major general Poof

. I am wondering if i should shoot in JPEG or raw? I have opened raw and jpeg in lightroom 5, but i am unable to see any difference at all? What advantages are there to sacrificing double the space for shooting raw as opposed to JPEG? Please ignore my inexperience for the sake of this discussion.

Well if it's a DSLR and as long as your frame buffer is half way decent, I'd go RAW. The images do take up some extra space but it will give you a lot more options in post as far as fixing things (like someone else mentioned, white balance, color correction, etc). If you think you'll need the extra speed for a long serious of images, then jpg might be worth a quick switchover - or if your using a camera where the burst mode overwhelms the buffer to quickly (most bridge cameras) then jpg is a good option, just be aware you won't have the editing capabilities later.

When I go about and will be away for a while I take a laptop with me, that way I can copy the images off the memory card to the laptop and clear off the memory card as needed. You can also purchase additional memory cards, if your just using the standard 30-45 mbs cards they are pretty cheap. I actually use a 95 mbs card myself, the 64 gb version is close to a little on the costly side (think the last one I paid like $120 for) so I find just bringing the laptop along on longer trips a lot more cost effective.

 

[hamlet]

With RAW, if you see something interesting and tar a quick snap only to realize that it's underexposed and the white balance is wrong, you can adjust it in LR fairly easily unless it's just really over/underexposed.

I am unfamiliar how its easy to edit the pictures? How is it easy?

It never seems to get mentioned that in order to make use of greater picture info. and editing latitude of the RAW format, there are certain REQUIREMENTS:

1. You need to be able to see weaknesses in white balance, highlight and shadow detail, colours, exposure, sharpness, background, etc. and what needs to be changed or tweaked and by how much.

2. You also need to be able to use the software to make exactly the level of change that is needed as in not too little or too much.

If you don't have these visual and editing skills yet, then I would doubt that there is much advantage to using RAW.

If we're comparing socks here, then i would agree with you. But i like what i can do to my raws.

 

[TonyD315]

When shooting in Raw+JPEG, will the camera still makes edits to the JPEG file the same as if you shot in just JPEG? Last night I tried to shoot in RAW+JPEG for the first time. I was taking pictures of the christmas tree while my GF decorated it using a D5000 and a 35mm f/1.8. My shots were constantly under exposed, even while raising the ISO. Today I imported the JPEG shots to iPhoto and the RAW shots to ViewNX 2. I was able to mess around with the RAW shots to lighten them. At first I was thinking the camera didn't edit the JPEG like it would when I shoot just JPEG, but now I'm starting to think it was me...growing pains of photography I guess...

 

[480sparky]

When shooting in Raw+JPEG, will the camera still makes edits to the JPEG file the same as if you shot in just JPEG?....

Exactly the same.

 

[TonyD315]

When shooting in Raw+JPEG, will the camera still makes edits to the JPEG file the same as if you shot in just JPEG?....

Exactly the same.

The same as in there are no edits to the JPEG? I just want to clarify because I'm going on a vacation next week and I don't have enough experience editing after the fact so I don't want to end up screwing my pictures...

 

[480sparky]

When shooting in Raw+JPEG, will the camera still makes edits to the JPEG file the same as if you shot in just JPEG?....

Exactly the same.

The same as in there are no edits to the JPEG? I just want to clarify because I'm going on a vacation next week and I don't have enough experience editing after the fact so I don't want to end up screwing my pictures...

No... whatever settings you use (sharpness, contrast, vividness, saturation, etc) applies to a JPEG, whether you record the raw file or not.

The beauty of raw files is the settings are not applied permanently. You can always change them later. Your software MAY apply the settings in your computer, but you'll be able to change them.

It's kinda like ordering a sandwich for lunch. A JPEG is the sandwich the kitchen sends to your table and you have no choice to but eat it. Shooting raw allows you to send the sandwich back and exchange the white bread for wheat, the beef for ham, add more mayo, delete the tomatoes, toss on three slices of bacon (yay, bacon!!!), and another pickle slice. And you can get unsweetened tea instead of sweetened. And your apple pie can become blueberry. And you get fries instead of chips. And cottage cheese instead of a lettuce salad.

 

[TonyD315]

Thanks, I have a better understanding of it now!

 

[The_Traveler]

When shooting in Raw+JPEG, will the camera still makes edits to the JPEG file the same as if you shot in just JPEG? Last night I tried to shoot in RAW+JPEG for the first time. I was taking pictures of the christmas tree while my GF decorated it using a D5000 and a 35mm f/1.8. My shots were constantly under exposed, even while raising the ISO. Today I imported the JPEG shots to iPhoto and the RAW shots to ViewNX 2. I was able to mess around with the RAW shots to lighten them. At first I was thinking the camera didn't edit the JPEG like it would when I shoot just JPEG, but now I'm starting to think it was me...growing pains of photography I guess...

That is because the camera is making the same decisions taking the increased iso into account.
If the shot that the camera decides to make is too dark, that's the time to use EXPOSURE COMPENSATION.
That tells the camera that whatever the camera decides, you want to add your input.

Exposure compensation with Nikon D5100

And yes, it was you. You didn't read the manual.

 

[Derrel]

One thing some people might enjoy is this: Shoot RAW + JPEG, but set the camera to B&W capture mode, and also if it allows, set a color filter effect, such as Yellow Filter, and also set toning to Sepia Tone, then set the in-camera sharpening fairly high, and set the contrast or Tone Curve or Tone Control to "AUTO", and set the JPEG size to medium-size, with FIne Compression (meaning, the least compression). This creates in-camera Black & White JPEG files that are already sharpened, are Medium-sized, and have a nice sepia tone B&W look, and the yellow filtration tends to make skies and landscape stuff look "right". The RAW files however, will have full RGB color information. My Canon 20D and my Canon 5D classic both made gorgeous, in-camera JPEG files using the above settings. I think this method of shooting in-camera B&W images has a few positives that converting piecemeal later does not yield.

 

[480sparky]

That is because the camera is making the same decisions taking the increased iso into account.
If the shot that the camera decides to make is too dark, that's the time to use EXPOSURE COMPENSATION.
That tells the camera that whatever the camera decides, you want to add your input.

Exposure compensation with Nikon D5100

And yes, it was you. You didn't read the manual.

You're assuming he was shooting in Auto.

 

[TonyD315]

I was shooting mostly in Aperture Priority with some in Manual or Shutter Priority.