JPEG vs. RAW - Discuss

[Tinderbox (UK)]

I wish i could shoot only jpeg and they be perfect every time, but reality is i need all the help i can get so i shoot raw.

John.

 

[Nettles]

I'm getting pretty sick of explaining how this all works.

Nobody's moronic here. What you're explaining is how it works for you. But the point is your opinions, preferences and methodology aren't shared by everyone.

So if others differ they are guilty of sloppy photography! Oh boy...

 

[sashbar]

Shooting in JPEG when there is no specific need to is just sloppy photography. There is positively no advantage to shooting JPEG unless you need a high burst rate, have lots of exposures, or there is some other specific reason to do so.

There is positively no debate here. I don't know what the deal is with people like Ken Rockwell and others who promote JPEG.

When people make this kind of statement I really need to look at their own work before proceeding beyond the first sentence.

 

[bribrius]

you have a compact point and shoot that shoot raw?

Yes.

Check this one out -- saves raw files: Amazon.com Canon PowerShot S110 12MP Digital Camera with 3-Inch LCD Black Point And Shoot Digital Cameras Camera Photo

I went through this years ago. First we go back 30 years. I always wanted a camera with me at all times. I used to try and carry mini 35mm film cameras -- like I had an Olympus XA. It never really worked out because the photos still weren't immediate enough. It would take days to finish a roll of film and then you had to develop it etc. etc. and I'd start leaving without the camera because I didn't have a roll of film and etc. etc.

When digital came along I revived my desire to always carry a camera and I started buying small shirt pocket cameras like the Sony WS or Panasonic FH series. I finally really got to carrying a camera at all times with those, and I went through a handful of them over the course of a couple years. But it was always the same story -- I'd get frustrated. I'd try to take some photos that the camera software just couldn't handle -- like backlit. I also got frustrated because shooting JPEGs in those cameras was too much work and took too much time. So I'd give the camera to a niece or nephew and soon enough I'd miss it and get another one.

Finally I decided I would have to compromise size and get the smallest compact I could find that still gave me control of the camera and saved a raw file. I got a Samsung EX-1 in 2011. Smaller width and height than a smart phone but considerably thicker. Fits easily in a jacket pocket and otherwise I've adjusted to it hanging from my wrist. I replaced it with the Samsung EX-2 when that was released. I have full manual exposure control, manual focus if needed and it saves 12 bit raw files so processing is faster and easier than saving JPEGs (for me). I consider the Samsung EX-2 my main camera. I have other cameras but the camera I use the most is the camera I have with me everywhere. I'm a lot like you in that regard in that I always have a camera with me and I take photos almost daily.

I had to hang 4 prints in a gallery last semester (faculty art show). One was a photo from my 5DmkII and three were from my EX-2 -- kinda says it. I took photos with my EX-2 yesterday, I took photos with it the day before, I took photos with it this morning, I'll probably use it tomorrow. I got rid of the 5DmkII last year and replaced it with a Fuji. The Fuji is a great camera and I use it more than I did the Canon, but it can still sit for weeks at a time in between uses.

For curiosity here's the camera JPEG of that above photo:

Joe

View attachment 96630

you got me here. I wish i had a compact that shot raw with manual options for when the occasional need arises.. I could have used it last night. Point and shoot photo....not much for manual options. As a jpeg i could still tweak this some. But it was pretty much d.o.a.. Garbage heap. Good thing it wasn't a important shot.

 

[Ysarex]

you got me here. I wish i had a compact that shot raw with manual options for when the occasional need arises.. I could have used it last night. Point and shoot photo....not much for manual options. As a jpeg i could still tweak this some. But it was pretty much d.o.a.. Garbage heap. Good thing it wasn't a important shot.

Yep, I have thousands of good photos I took over the years when I was carrying the pocket point and shoots. And a couple of the Sony WS series did have a manual exposure option. They all had EC control. But the bottom line really is the JPEG processors. All those good photos are shots with easy light, or rather easy JPEG light. When you shoot camera JPEG you accept the limitations of the camera's image processor. There's a lot that they just can't do. It's not that the JPEGs from the cameras are inherently bad it's that the camera processing software is pretty limited. As noted further back in this thread JPEG engines have gotten a lot better over recent years such that in conditions where they can deliver a good result, the photos are fine. The problem remains those other conditions where the JPEG engines fall down; and I still want to take photos in those other conditions.

Joe

 

[bribrius]

you got me here. I wish i had a compact that shot raw with manual options for when the occasional need arises.. I could have used it last night. Point and shoot photo....not much for manual options. As a jpeg i could still tweak this some. But it was pretty much d.o.a.. Garbage heap. Good thing it wasn't a important shot.

Yep, I have thousands of good photos I took over the years when I was carrying the pocket point and shoots. And a couple of the Sony WS series did have a manual exposure option. They all had EC control. But the bottom line really is the JPEG processors. All those good photos are shots with easy light, or rather easy JPEG light. When you shoot camera JPEG you accept the limitations of the camera's image processor. There's a lot that they just can't do. It's not that the JPEGs from the cameras are inherently bad it's that the camera processing software is pretty limited. As noted further back in this thread JPEG engines have gotten a lot better over recent years such that in conditions where they can deliver a good result, the photos are fine. The problem remains those other conditions where the JPEG engines fall down; and I still want to take photos in those other conditions.

Joe

i could see how that could sometimes come in handy. Right now i just shoot it anyway. If it doesn't work good enough to be desired i go back with a dslr. But obviously, that isn't always so easily done the moment is lost.

 

[unpopular]

So if others differ they are guilty of sloppy photography! Oh boy...

Nobody has any conviction because some people are too damn sensitive. I'm not about to pander to insecurity. Sorry if my position offends people.

There is *no* good reason to shoot JPEG aside from file size and the misconception that SOOC is impressive, and plenty of reason not to (aside from mis-exposure).

But hey. If limiting your DSLR to the abilities of consumer-grade slide film makes you feel like a man, go for it. (ok, I'll admit that's a bit of an exaggeration)

When people make this kind of statement I really need to look at their own work before proceeding beyond the first sentence.

I don't feed fallacious arguments. Sorry.

 

[pixmedic]

So if others differ they are guilty of sloppy photography! Oh boy...

Nobody has any conviction because some people are too damn sensitive. I'm not about to pander to insecurity. Sorry if my position offends people.

There is *no* good reason to shoot JPEG aside from file size and the misconception that SOOC is impressive, and plenty of reason not to (aside from mis-exposure).

When people make this kind of statement I really need to look at their own work before proceeding beyond the first sentence.

I don't feed fallacious arguments. Sorry.

so, just out of curiosity....and dont get me wrong, 'cause I only shoot raw...but I really do think this is a pretty legitimate question....
why, if in fact there is *no* good reason to shoot jpeg (except for the reasons you mentioned in previous posts)
does every camera manufacturer that makes a digital camera have jpeg as an output option?
why not eliminate jpeg as a camera output format all together and force people to do it right?...why not only have jpeg as a format you can get after converting from a raw file?

 

[Vtec44]

so, just out of curiosity....and dont get me wrong, 'cause I only shoot raw...but I really do think this is a pretty legitimate question....
why, if in fact there is *no* good reason to shoot jpeg (except for the reasons you mentioned in previous posts)

IMHO, those are pretty darn good reasons. Most event, news, and sports photographers don't shoot RAW.

 

[Derrel]

Here's a tip to speed up editing of images. Shoot raw + jpeg. Crank the in-camera sharpening up very high. Set the image size to one that your monitor can display without the need to down-size the images. Shoot your assignment, then do a slide show of the SOOC JPEG images to evaluate the focus/composition/artistic impact of the images. With the in-camera sharpening set very high and the images small enough that the OS does not need to re-sample each and every JPEG to display it, it's much easier to differentiate between dead-on focus and just so slightly soft images. I find this use of the SOOC jpegs makes my workflow a hell of a lot faster and overall, more effective than one-at-a-time clicking through huge raw files in a clumsy "interface". With the slide show I can INSTANTLY evaluate which images I want to either keep, or eliminate.

 

[bribrius]

So if others differ they are guilty of sloppy photography! Oh boy...

Nobody has any conviction because some people are too damn sensitive. I'm not about to pander to insecurity. Sorry if my position offends people.

There is *no* good reason to shoot JPEG aside from file size and the misconception that SOOC is impressive, and plenty of reason not to (aside from mis-exposure).

When people make this kind of statement I really need to look at their own work before proceeding beyond the first sentence.

I don't feed fallacious arguments. Sorry.

so, just out of curiosity....and dont get me wrong, 'cause I only shoot raw...but I really do think this is a pretty legitimate question....
why, if in fact there is *no* good reason to shoot jpeg (except for the reasons you mentioned in previous posts)
does every camera manufacturer that makes a digital camera have jpeg as an output option?
why not eliminate jpeg as a camera output format all together and force people to do it right?...why not only have jpeg as a format you can get after converting from a raw file?

because jpeg is the standard of the file formats and the vast majority shot jpegs at least some of the time.

 

[480sparky]

I purchased a P7100 for the simple reason to have a compact (not P&S) that is capable of .NRW (Nikons raw format for compacts). Although it's primary function is to be a jobsite documentation camera (in JPEG mode), I would have a small, light camera that is capable of raw files should I need one.

 

[Ysarex]

so, just out of curiosity....and dont get me wrong, 'cause I only shoot raw...but I really do think this is a pretty legitimate question....
why, if in fact there is *no* good reason to shoot jpeg (except for the reasons you mentioned in previous posts)
does every camera manufacturer that makes a digital camera have jpeg as an output option?
why not eliminate jpeg as a camera output format all together and force people to do it right?...why not only have jpeg as a format you can get after converting from a raw file?

That one's easy: They don't design cameras to take better photos, they design cameras to sell more cameras. Nothing they won't do if they think it will sell.

Joe

 

[bribrius]

I purchased a P7100 for the simple reason to have a compact (not P&S) that is capable of .NRW (Nikons raw format for compacts). Although it's primary function is to be a jobsite documentation camera (in JPEG mode), I would have a small, light camera that is capable of raw files should I need one.

what am i the only one that hauls out a dslr just for raw files?????????????????????

 

[Ysarex]

because jpeg is the standard of the file formats and the vast majority shot jpegs at least some of the time.

It's not about JPEG per se -- it's about how you get the JPEG.

Joe