raw/jpeg or not to raw/jpeg

[a.loredo]

i like to know if i should save my shoots on raw/jpeg mode or just in jpeg mode.

[Killeenguy]

hey bud...i've read the threads on raw and it seems that's the way of the future hehe so to speak...but for a beginner and a experienced studio photographer jpeg is all i needed when i first started out...but if when ur ready to explore the greater editing options of a raw file then take that leap...but it comes w/ its drawbacks...such as taking up more disc space.

[a.loredo]

So i take it that raw would be serious editning. Yeah iam just getting started and i trying to get in all this info in appritiate the help.......

[dbphotos]

If you are going to want them long term I'd use RAW, although jpg will be here forever. You might look at Adobe DNG as well, not the standrad yet, but who knows.

[JamesB]

raw is not for everyone. Many people strictly use raw, many dont. you do have a lot of added benefit to use raw, but it will take a lot more storage for all your raw files.

I shoot jpg only and when I know I have a shot I will need the extra data that raw provides I will shot raw. for me thats only a few times a year.

there are some extra conversion steps you need to do, but some programs offer auto conversions and such.

I say give it a try in raw/jpg and just jpg and see what works for you. If you will be selling or doing a lot of large prints (16x20 or bigger) then raw is best. if you are not going to do that then may jpg will work better.

James

[danflake]

I always shoot RAW only because I am paranoid that later, I will regret not shooting in RAW. Another disadvantage to RAW is that it takes alot more time to edit the pix since they are so large. It takes me a while to go through my photos after a session because of this. I understand that Photoshop CS2 has a new built-in process to save files in specified formats...I might just have to get it to speed up the process. Anyway, if you have a project that requires fast turn-around, RAW might not be the best.

[jheiliger]

I have been shooting RAW only for about 3 years, and would never go back. It has saved me more times than I care to mention, and has reduced my workflow significantly.

I love it and am a big proponent.

I use Capture One for my RAW conversions....

[mattchow]

i use RAW+JPEG as space allows.

[danflake]

Originally Posted by jheiliger

I have been shooting RAW only for about 3 years, and would never go back. It has saved me more times than I care to mention, and has reduced my workflow significantly.

I love it and am a big proponent.

I use Capture One for my RAW conversions....

jheliger--can you explain how RAW reduces your workflow? That is the only issue I have with RAW. It takes forever to go through and make the initial adjustments and then save as TIF files.

[Hogleg 44]

Originally Posted by danflake

jheliger--can you explain how RAW reduces your workflow? That is the only issue I have with RAW. It takes forever to go through and make the initial adjustments and then save as TIF files.

I shoot Raw only because it allows me to correct exposure mistakes, and make many critical adjustments that i could not do if I shot jpg only. But. I convert directly to jpg and seldom ever tiff. You don't have to convert to tiff, unless you need to make very serious critical adjustments, to achieve perfection, before going to jpg. I don't need my pictures to be perfect. And if I did, I wouldn't know what perfect was anyway!

[RubenZamora]

I'm the same, I only shoot RAW when its very important I don't screw up which is rare though. For weddings , I shot RAW, for contest, RAW, etc. but for regular events jpeg is fine.

[zoodale]

I used to use JPEG all the time. I then started doing RAW/JPEG and now only do RAW.

By shooting RAW, I get what I feel is more control over my images before converting them to their more utilitarian formats (generally TIFF; sometimes JPEG).

I have heard some people use RAW/JPEG so they can quickly review their images without opening Photoshop or other RAW applications. I found that method cumbersome, confusing, and time-consuming. I shoot in RAW, process and/or remove images in RAWshooter, then convert to TIFF.

regards,

[PeteQ]

Another RAW only person here. Because the one time I don't will be the time I capture something that I will really wish I had the extra that RAW allows. I do a quick review and toss the trash images, burn the RAW files to disk and then I have my master copy. From there I edit files on the hard drive and when all is said and done I burn a second disk of my retouch/crops/etc. Kind of a before and after deal. It may be a little anal, but I know that I have at least two copies of any image I decided to keep. Then if my hard drive were to crash, etc. I haven't lost all. I'm still refining my workflow and am looking forward to Apple's Aperture program to help me catalog images....

[danflake]

Does RAWShooter have the ablility to read files directly from the camera when they are shot. Nikon Capture has this feature. If you have your computer at the shoot (most likely a studio), each time you take a shot NC automatically presents in on the PC screen. Quite handy; you can see your shots actual size as you take them.

[eurotrash]

I shoot ALL RAW then when i get home ill select all the images and just covert and save all to 16bit 350dpi jpegs. then i can cut those down and choose which ones to edit. saves space on the card.