RAW, JPEG or both

[jagphoto]

I know this has been asked before, but I can't find the thread. I just installed PS Elements 4 and am considering shooting in RAW. I am nervous though!!! I have an important shoot this afternoon. Should I shoot in RAW, JPEG, or both?? Also, can I convert the RAW images to JPEG for the clients? (I'm sorry if that's a photo 101 question, I have never shot in RAW format before)

Thanks,
Lisa

[Shane]

Yes, the RAW images can be converted to JPG files with a simple RAW viewer (several free available). Shooting in RAW simply gives you MUCH more control over the photos, although it will increase your workflow significantly until you are used to dealing with the files.

[Detonate]

If it's an important shoot, then RAW is the way to go. Since you can adjust exposure, white balance, and a number of other settings in your digital darkroom, rather than making them in the field.

I like shooting RAW + JPEG if I have the free space. This way I have my negatives, but if the JPEGs look good, I use them. No need to complicate things if the JPEGs will do the trick.

Trust me that only you will notice the smallest of tweaks made to a RAW file, but if you decide to just NOT shoot in raw. That will be the day that you shoot with flourecent White Balance set during your outdoor sunshine shoot.

[Clint_Smith]

I shoot RAW for anything that I get paid for. if it is importtant...shoot raw.

[jangliss]

With the thread of RAW in mind, Nikon list their equipment with the ability to save in NEF (RAW). I'm assuming that they just branded it with their name, rather than making their own file type, and making it propriatary? Ie, can I edit the NEF file in Photoshop? :)

[Detonate]

All RAW files are proprietary. But Photoshop opens all NEF's as far as I know.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by Detonate

All RAW files are proprietary. But Photoshop opens all NEF's as far as I know.

There has been some issue about Nikon encrypting part of their NEF file. Which could under the DMCA be a crime to decrypt by a third party (ie. Adobe).

Here are some of the major points.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/con...id=7-6466-7776

Adobe and Nikon finally relented. This is good reason to support an open standard for raw files along the lines of Adobe's DNG. I like the way Leica has embraced DNG.

[jeffkohn]

Here's a recent thread where the pros/cons of RAW were discussed: http://www.texasphotoforum.com/forum...ad.php?t=19265

For your shoot (assuming you see this before then) I might suggest RAW + JPG so that way if you decide that tackling the RAW workflow on short notice is too much you can at least fall back on the JPG's and have something to deliver. But I think once you work with RAW a bit you'll find it's well worth it.

[sbp]

RAW for sure. I don't even change now my setting from RAW to jpgs. Even my personal photos are in RAW too.

[johnastovall]

Here is a good comparison of RAW and JPEG from Luminous Landscape.

It's a good unbiased look at the two formats and when and way to use them.

[Murph]

I tend to shoot JPEG, however with the D2X(when it arrives), I will probably start shooting RAW+JPEG. Now a silly question on the RAW+JPEG: Can I shoot High Quality JPG or do I have to settle for basic quality?

[jeffkohn]

On the D2x you can choose whatever quality of JPEG you want when shooting RAW+JPG. Just be aware, if you shoot uncompressed NEF + hiqh-quality JPEG on a 12 megapixel camera you're looking at about 25MB per shot.

[CypressPhotog]

Check out the latest Shutterfly Mag. They have several things on RAW and it's benefits. Plus, they completely redesigned the layout...I think it is now more appealing.