Do you shoot RAW or JPEG?

[Maisie]

Question for everyone, and if you could be so kind to vote too.

I'd like to know who shoots RAW or JPEG (or both), and why?

[Screechy]

This has been my first season that i've gone exclusively RAW. I figured that when I get to know how to use PhotoShop properly then i'll have a wealth of material to practice with. Does eat up the memory cards though and my Epson P3000 portable picture hard drive doesn't know what's hit it!

[Pat Murphy]

Started shooting RAW late last year on holiday in NZ. Only because If I messed up, I might be able to recover more images and it was a once in a lifetime trip (turns out that's not the case )
Pros: More information stored means better opportunities to correct mistakes i.e White Balance correction for a kick off . Noise Reduction seems to work better for me as well.

Cons: Hard Drive Space. Get used to file sizes in the 20Mb plus region. Soon fills up that Hard Drive Time is also a problem, having to process every image, then open and Save As a JPEG for printing or web use. Still working through shots from late last year but as my editing gets better, I find myself going back and playing around again.

Might be an Idea for a New Thread. "RAW, How do you process yours?"

Pat

[Pen Pusher]

Used to shoot RAW but with the latest sensors and software in the Sony Alpha and NEX cameras you would be hard pushed to notice the difference, apart from pixel peeping, between RAW & Jpeg.

Brian

[TBPhoto]

Started shooting RAW 2 months ago, just because you can almost get what you want out of it, without the camera changing stuff. I only used JPEG for so long as you can fit more photos into one card, and open them much easier on the computer!

[BMrider]

I shoot Raw all the time, I have full control over Exposure and WB and many other areas when processing the image now and in any other way in the future, you are quite limited with JPG.

[blackcat]

JPEG,
Canon 550d is to slow in RAW and frankly RAW Scares me.
On occasions in harsh light,Sunsets or night i sometimes shoot JPEG & RAW as a get out incase i really blow out something.
Every time i open RAW in Lightroom it just looks flat and i don't really know where to go to get that Punch,

Agree with white balance though,Very important and can see why people use RAW but it's just not for me at the moment,

Mark.

[flashman8]

I shoot in high quiality jpeg on my Sony A700, the results are good enough for weddings.....................

another reason why is that my pc is slow,and the Sony software is not the fastest out there, and I cant afford to upgrade either at the moment

[bigcrow]

Been shooting RAW for a couple of years now, would never go back to JPEG. You can do so much more with a RAW file, white balance correction & exposure correction & the like..

[Craig]

Both. I use the JPEGs as negatives as they're quicker to scan through and see what you want to process, but then do any editing work on the RAW file.

[Jetnoise]

Like Craig, I do both for most "important" shoots using the jpeg files as previews and RAW files for editing. However "Both" is not an option on the voting buttons

Cheers,
Ralph

[Tommy]

JPEG at the moment. I did the Rhyl show in RAW but my memory cards took a hit so I'll need to buy more for bigger shows like RIAT etc, but seeing as I'm pretty green in the DSLR regard, I'm sticking to JPEG for the time being whilst I get to know my kit/editing software etc...

[Phantom 892]

I love and am quite happy using JPEG 95% of the time.
I use RAW if i know i am going to have to spend a bit of time on the finished product - like a landscape shot that will need various exposure compensation, etc.

[Talldan76]

At the moment I shoot in JPEG - mainly down to me not really knowing what to do post shooting with the formatting etc...

Plus the camera I have isn't really quick enough at writing the RAW images to the memory card...

Once I get a bit better at taking pics then I will look at using RAW.

[Hatstand]

I shoot JPG-only, for the speed. And because I know my camera well enough, that I generally know what my JPG results will be... I don't feel any need for a RAW safety net, and I can't be bothered spending much time on post-processing anyway. RAW's would simply gobble up disc space and never get used.

[DerekF]

I've shot RAW (or NEF) since I've had a DSLR. Flash cards and hard drive space is so cheap now, space isn't an issue and gives much more leeway in terms processing. I process them in Capture One in batch mode so it isn't really any more time consuming.

[Macc]

RAW. The flexibility in post processing is excellent and I also like being able to return to re-edit from scratch unlike JPEGs where unless you keep the original and the edit (which then takes up the same as, if not more than, RAW) which is a nuisance and also the reason for most of my before mid-2009 being left untouched.

[hmeasures]

RAW all day long. Use Lightroom to edit so even if I shot JPEG I would have the same processing stream, makes sense to shoot RAW!!

Harry.

[JackyRIATWilson]

Recently converted to RAW. Only downside is I see a lot more noise in my photos which I can easily correct.

Jack.

[Hatstand]

I also like being able to return to re-edit from scratch unlike JPEGs where unless you keep the original and the edit (which then takes up the same as, if not more than, RAW) which is a nuisance and also the reason for most of my before mid-2009 being left untouched.

Erm... what is stopping people re-editing their photos from scratch, using a JPG original instead of a RAW? (I seem to manage that just fine?)

And are you saying that people who edit from RAW... only keep the RAWs, and don't save any edits? I am not convinced that is true.

Regardless:
People that only keep originals, and no edits... will surely use less space if their originals are JPGs.
People that keep both originals and edits... will surely still use less space if their originals are JPGs.

And personally, I'd have to save a very large number of edits of each original, before they started taking up more space than even a single RAW. Because the purpose of my edits is ultimately to reduce images for sharing on forums, or by email :-D

There's plenty of good reasons to use RAW, but the idea that it leads to less disc space usage...?! O_o

[Macc]

I also like being able to return to re-edit from scratch unlike JPEGs where unless you keep the original and the edit (which then takes up the same as, if not more than, RAW) which is a nuisance and also the reason for most of my before mid-2009 being left untouched.

Erm... what is stopping people re-editing their photos from scratch, using a JPG original instead of a RAW? (I seem to manage that just fine?)

And are you saying that people who edit from RAW... only keep the RAWs, and don't save any edits? I am not convinced that is true.

Regardless:
People that only keep originals, and no edits... will surely use less space if their originals are JPGs.
People that keep both originals and edits... will surely still use less space if their originals are JPGs.

And personally, I'd have to save a very large number of edits of each original, before they started taking up more space than even a single RAW. Because the purpose of my edits is ultimately to reduce images for sharing on forums, or by email

There's plenty of good reasons to use RAW, but the idea that it leads to less disc space usage...?! O_o

Well you would have the original plus the full size edit plus the web size edit which is the same size as a RAW file plus the web size edit. Unless you're saying you want to re-edit from the original everytime you use it.

Your penultimate point makes no sense, the resulting jpeg on a forum will be the same size no matter what format it originates in because it'll be the same file.

[Hatstand]

Well you would have the original plus the full size edit plus the web size edit which is the same size as a RAW file plus the web size edit.

Ah, no - in my case, I mostly only have the original JPG's.

I only edit about 30 or so shots per show (out of hundreds) for posting on forums. Most edits are only saved at reduced size, with just a handful saved at full size for printing. The rest I don't bother editing at all - nobody's going to see them but me, and I only view them onscreen.

If I used RAW-only, I'd have to do some basic processing on every image and save the results (which could be batched using presets, but still)... otherwise viewing them would much slower.

If I used RAW+JPG, I'd use the JPG's for viewing and most of the RAWs would be redundant.

Your penultimate point makes no sense, the resulting jpeg on a forum will be the same size no matter what format it originates in because it'll be the same file.

That was exactly my point. You seemed to be saying that RAW would ultimately require less space... which didn't make sense to me - RAW originals are larger than JPG originals, while edits are the same for either...

[Hammy]

RAW + JPEG here.

[ns_sherlock]

DNG

[Vodka]

Raw and jpg mode...

For day to day personal use i would normally use the jpg for speed and fit for use, web etc though for a large print if there is a specific Image, I go to the RAW file. I do use a White balance EXpodisc and never rely on auto WB on camera though. My custom jpg style has probably had about 8 stages of tweaking/ improvment over four years on 5dii's & 7d bodies

All paying comercial clients I always use RAW.

Weddings? I'm flabbergasted that anyone would even consider using JPG. With so many variables, light sources both ambient and flash, working at speed, one shot must get, no fail photography! Raw is you best freind and sometimes your get out of jail card! Shooting in very low lite churches, reception venues, the White dress under all those variable light sources! Noise ?
There again the upside for me personally with any competition using jpg, it keeps me very very busy! In actual fact an off shoot has been re-editing jpg shooters the last 2-3 years. The amount of correction work I have been requested too perform for couple s who have been submitted some real shockers has acutely increased. Perhaps as much as a quarter of my work now is re-retouching.

Of course horses for courses, sauasge meat in - sausage rolls out.