From what I have heard shooting in RAW helps in the post processing phase of your piece. RAW includes considerably more information because the camera has not compressed the picture into a JPEG yet. Since I don't do too much post processing I still shoot in JPEG format. Eventually when I start getting back into photoshop I will probably start shooting in RAW.
If this info is incorrect in any way feel free to correct me!
I shoot in RAW always! Gives you much more control over the image in post processing. Why limit the information you can receive when you are shooting with a camera that is capable of shooting in RAW format?
Even though I do at times a lot of post processing on some photos, the biggest format my photos will most likely reach is a 4x6 print, video or web upload. Since this is the case, I don't shoot in RAW. I see it as too much effort for the end result. But every professional will tell you that RAW is the only way to go.
I have never tried shooting in RAW. I guess I just have never ventured there and to be honest, I have no clue what to do with the RAW photos. Will have to learn someday. Oh, and don't RAW images take up a lot of space on your memory disc?
I go back and forth between the two, but have been shooting in RAW more consistently the past month or so. The files are enormous, so for the 365 project, I upload the day's possibilities to my Mac, mess around with some basic editing in iPhoto, or Photoshop, then delete all the outtakes for the day. Each photo is about 4200 x 2800 pixels and can be as much as 5 MB. It's more work to shoot in RAW for me, but I have quite a bit to learn and find that this pushes my thinking on both my shooting, and later processing.
I always shoot RAW but sometimes I shoot in JPEG, depends what I'm shooting and how many photos I want to take that day, because RAW take up a lot of space on the memory card.
One pretty large advantage of RAW formats is that you can tinker with stuff afterwards without compromising image quality. Stuff like white balance, which if you've only got a JPG you can't do anything about (without nausing things right up).
That said, due to my archaic paintshop pro 7 not knowing how to handle any RAW formats at all, I'm mostly a JPG man.
If your camera can shoot in RAW, then in many cases it can probably shoot both at the same time anyways. If you have it, use it. It can't hurt. Memory is so cheap these days that storage doesn't really come into it for most situations.
Even if you don't have the software at the moment to work with RAW files, you'll have them saved so that down the track you can go back to your old work and perhaps get more our of your images.
I'm still pretty new to all of this, but these are a few things I've learnt so far.
I shoot in RAW+jpg. The jpg images are usually for emailing around to friends. For any shots I want to put up on the web or print I'll normally do some post-processing (levels, contrast, colour saturation) with the RAW file before uploading/printing.
There are quite a few free RAW editing tools available. One of the best for Windows and Linux is Raw Therapee ( http://www.rawtherapee.com/). Another good one is UFRaw ( http://ufraw.sourceforge.net/index.html) which comes as either a stand alone version or a plug in for The Gimp (a free photo editing program similar to Photoshop - http://gimp.org/) and is also available for Mac OSX.
I just started shooting RAW as an experiment about a month ago. My analysis...the files are way too big, and I never had a problem in post processing beforehand when I shot JPEG. I'm switching back to JPEG. No one that sees my images knows the difference. I stopped listening to the camera "bokeh-meisters" (you know who I'm talking about...yeah, the digi-heads) a long time ago.
I used to shoot jpeg, moved to raw+jpeg, and stuck with raw. While I like how the camera makes the shot more vivid, I like the control I get from PP'ing a raw image. Also, it makes WBing easier since I dont need to do it in the field.
I am a professional. I have shot both formats. I shoot strictly jpeg all the time now. (shhh! hahaha) I found there is too much time involved with processing RAW files, too much storage involved ... and frankly, unless you really foul up an image with the exposure, the benefits of shooting with it don't weigh enough for ME. My clients can't tell the difference. I would only shoot RAW if I was shooting for competition or printing billboards.
Oh, and because the files are big in RAW, I have two external hard drives to store everything on. I am also thinking of an offsite place to store them. I store processed files on Flickr and have a few web albums, but need another safe place for just the RAW files in case. I'm thinking of going RAID too. Need money. LOL! I burn DVDs of files as well. Macintosh also has Time Machine, but though I use it, it's confusing to me how to grab something back in time, especially if it's on an external hard drive. I must be stupid.
I tried shooting in RAW to see what all the hubub was about, but wasn't impressed. Maybe I just don't need THAT much for post-processing, but it just seemed like way more trouble than it was worth for me, with all the big files and not being to edit in the ways I was used to. I shoot in highest quality JPEG and that works fine for me.
@Rochelle - that's awesome. Thanks for your in-the-field perspective on this. :) I have always shot JPG, but now have a DSLR and have considered going RAW. I have already gotten pretty good at getting a good white balance and exposure in the camera though, so wasn't sure really what benefit it would give me to shoot RAW, but I kind of felt like I was "supposed" to shot RAW since I'm pushing myself to be more professional. Good to know that some pros still shoot in JPG. :)
I shoot in RAW since I thought RAW+JPG just chewed up too much space. As I go along, i'm finding that i'm modifying the pictures I take slightly... whether its bumping up certain colours, etc and I like the flexibility I get with RAW. That said, when i'm on holiday and have to convert to JPG to post them... its a pain :)
I shoot JPG unless its an important event or I think I'm going to be doing large format printing. Otherwise if its just for me to share I don't need all the hassel of shooting RAW.
RAW is great for reducing noise and making white balance corrections but everything else I can do in photoshop just fine with my JPGs
I'm usually on JPG, but when setting a scene I go to RAW+hq JPG. The JPG to get an impression on what the camera would have liked to do, and the RAW to tweak it to my own liking.
But it does require me to use my big computer, as I usually like to use my netbook. It can process raw files, but .. it .. is .. so .. slow .. :-)
I use iPhoto on my computer to upload my pictures off my camera, and it seems that iPhoto doesn't read RAW. I do a little bit with photoshop, but i've never had a problem not being able to do what I want to do to the photo while shooting in JPEG.
Ok - so i have been shooting in RAW. not made huge amounts of difference to my processing though but will continue to use it for now. Not gained a huge amount so far though from using it.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
If this info is incorrect in any way feel free to correct me!
(HOWEVER, that may be because I'm also not used to RAW yet)
That said, due to my archaic paintshop pro 7 not knowing how to handle any RAW formats at all, I'm mostly a JPG man.
Even if you don't have the software at the moment to work with RAW files, you'll have them saved so that down the track you can go back to your old work and perhaps get more our of your images.
I'm still pretty new to all of this, but these are a few things I've learnt so far.
There are quite a few free RAW editing tools available. One of the best for Windows and Linux is Raw Therapee ( http://www.rawtherapee.com/). Another good one is UFRaw ( http://ufraw.sourceforge.net/index.html) which comes as either a stand alone version or a plug in for The Gimp (a free photo editing program similar to Photoshop - http://gimp.org/) and is also available for Mac OSX.
Maybe I just like suffering...
RAW is great for reducing noise and making white balance corrections but everything else I can do in photoshop just fine with my JPGs
But it does require me to use my big computer, as I usually like to use my netbook. It can process raw files, but .. it .. is .. so .. slow .. :-)
Ok - so i have been shooting in RAW. not made huge amounts of difference to my processing though but will continue to use it for now. Not gained a huge amount so far though from using it.