Poll: Do You Shoot RAW or JPG?

[PhotoXopher]

Since the question gets asked quite often, let's see where everyone really stands and get some real numbers.

The poll is anonymous, and the thread isn't to argue about what is better - only to gather the stats of the members who vote.

 

[Plato]

Since the question gets asked quite often, let's see where everyone really stands and get some real numbers.

The poll is anonymous, and the thread isn't to argue about what is better - only to gather the stats of the members who vote.

"Both" is not a permitted answer.

 

[Goontz]

Nice, I'm in.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

The only time I don't shoot RAW is when i'm shooting sports (who would want to process a few thousand images at the end of the day? not me), or when my cards are almost full, which is almost never.

Other then that, if you've got the time, software, space, and expertise, then there is no reason not to shoot RAW.

Better color, Better acuity, More control, all in all, a higher quality result when you have good technique.

 

[Lyncca]

I'm a RAW girl! I want my pictures to be the absolute best they can be, so this gives me the freedom to do necessary edits, selective exposure adjustment, etc.

I want to control what my photos look like, not my camera (although I do believe in exposing correctly and knowing the fundamentals of taking a correct picture), but I would rather put my white balance on auto and make minor corrections than miss shots of a two year old running around a park because I am trying to measure a different custom white balance every 5 feet.

 

[Overread]

Almost all my shooting is in RAW mode - heck half the time even cheap family shots (that is shot whereI am really not thinking and just snapshotting) end up being RAW just because I am shooting in that mode at the time and never bother changing it.

Memory card space is not too much bother since cards are very cheap and I can shoot over 2000 shots with only 2*4GB and 2*2GB cards and still have a whole 2GB at least spare.

Only time I would really shift to JEPG was if I was needing to use a very fast and long burst of shots for a specific reason (my 400D has a limited speed when shooting RAW when compared to higher level bodies) or if I was really not caring about the shots but still wanted to take htem to record what I saw.

Stilll its RAW mode almost all the time for me.

 

[camz]

Raw just how I like my steaks and sushi :greenpbl:

 

[eric-holmes]

Wow, maybe I should read up on the advantages of shooting RAW.

 

[Plato]

Wow, maybe I should read up on the advantages of shooting RAW.

Naah...
It's just a fad. Like zippers and the Internet.

 

[Peanuts]

RAW 90% of the time. Anything I am getting paid for is definitely RAW. Anything hwere I want to shoot and burn like a family get together.. JPEG.

 

[Lyncca]

Wow, maybe I should read up on the advantages of shooting RAW.

Naah...
It's just a fad. Like zippers and the Internet.

LOL

 

[JamesMason]

Wow, maybe I should read up on the advantages of shooting RAW.

Naah...
It's just a fad. Like zippers and the Internet.

JPG 4 life !!!!!

 

[FidelCastrovich]

I don't understand RAW.
I've read about everything there's to read about it, done dozens of stress tests, and i can't seem to be able to tell the difference. If there are differences, they usually stem from different editing processes.

And the extra storage space needed for RAW pretty much kills the format for me...I shoot tons every day, and RAW just doesn't make any sense...the files are huge!!!

 

[kundalini]

Always RAW.... sometimes RAW+JPEG if it's a shoot and burn, but there might be a gem in the bunch and this gives me the RAW file to play with.

I did set the QUAL to TIFF once...... by mistake........ I was "happy" (on the night)....... it was dark........ didn't have my glasses. They all got binned anyway. :lmao:

 

[Garbz]

If there are differences, they usually stem from different editing processes.

Precisely. If you don't edit the file then there's no benefit of RAW. The standard colour space can cram all visible colours into an 8bit JPEG. You start editing though and you want your 12 or 14 bit data so the algorithms have more sample points for their estimations of what the data should be when you slide some sliders around in image editing software.

For instance, RAW has enough data to adjust white balance without loss of fidelity. JPEG does not, you try and bump up the orange channel and you'll introduce colour artefacts in the others.

If you don't edit, don't bother. It's an extra step you don't need to deal with. That RAW makes everything better is a somewhat averagely common misconception. I shoot RAW, I edit a lot.