Active Member
I always shoot RAW and edit in Lightroom and PS. I understand why some people shoot jpeg though, and I suspect that if I shot sports I would shoot jpeg too.
If I had a D800 with its huge data files I might be tempted to shoot jpeg... Huzzah for the D600.
Very true if only to speed up the shoot rate at sports events Most of the stuff I shoot doesnt need the huge buffer
Always RAW. Except I need more hard drives. I could go clear some things out but it's easier to just get more hard drives.
Junior Member
I am retired, have plenty of time, am a nature photographer so RAW is a must for me. It gives me complete control and always retains the original image. Imo, the only reason to use jpeg would be the time element such as a journalist etc would need, and as said jpeg is good. If your not in a rush use RAW.
Forum Veteran
I used to shoot jpg until I lost a photo due to the wrong WB setting. I always thought editing raw would be a hassle. Now I realise that editing raw is just as quick, if not quicker, than editing jpg. I use Adobe Camera Raw, which can handle 95% of my editing (so same as if I was using Lightroom I understand). I have also since discovered that you can edit jpg in ACR too, so would be willing to shoot jpg for more photos per card or extra fps if reuired.
Raw is there, it's available, it has more "latitude", so I use it. You can always convert to jpg later if you wish.
Forum Veteran
Ahhh the good old "raw vs jpg" conversation. Can't have a functional photography forum without this conversation.
My answer is this: For shots I know I won't be doing a lot of PP work... jpg. For "serious" work.... raw.
Stuff that will be uploaded to an online gallery or just to Facebook it's jpg all the way. No fuss, no huge redundant files. Anything remotely more serious than that goes to a raw file.
Member
gotta agree with Russ above. If white balance is incorrect, the shots can be difficult to be correct. Raw allows for this and the programs that I use are non-destructive to the original file. That being said if speed is necessary then jpeg is reasonable alternative especially for indoor sports. Another plug for raw however is shooting an indoor sporting event when it cant be determined what type of fluorescent lighting is available. I will set the WB to different fluorescent settings and judge by the monitor. This can be further tweaked later. It may be sacreligious but I have found myself using Auto WB for some picture shoots and have found that Auto WB produced better images than WB set to daylight, tungsten or flash.
Haven't been disappointed with the D600 in this regard. Its a damn decent piece of technology that got a bad rap with oil spots and dust on the sensor. Think Nikon resolved these issues
I shoot Raw on one card and Jpeg on the other, using the Jpegs to get a quick look and then pick my best shots for post processing from Raw using Photoshop CS6.
Forum Veteran
...jpeg is reasonable alternative especially for indoor sports.
That's definitely when I go raw. The lights tend to cycle in gyms etc so a different WB can be required from one shot to the next even in a burst! I was next to a pro taking shots and he thought his camera was bung as sequential shots ina burst had different WB looks (and this was a D4!), but it was the lights cycling!
Hi i shoot in Raw+ and with a nice fast storage card in my D5100 i have never had an issue using bursts. I took some test pics of a speed boat just outside our local Harbor and they came out fine.
I love the editing options working in Raw gives you.
Ian.
New Member
i absolutely love raw! raw has saved me numerous times and with lightroom, the workflow is really easy to deal with
Active Member
Ahhh the good old "raw vs jpg" conversation. Can't have a functional photography forum without this conversation.
lol, so true. least its not the film vs digital anymore.
That's definitely when I go raw. The lights tend to cycle in gyms etc so a different WB can be required from one shot to the next even in a burst! I was next to a pro taking shots and he thought his camera was bung as sequential shots ina burst had different WB looks (and this was a D4!), but it was the lights cycling!
i know exactly what you mean. nothing better than a bunch flickering fluorescent bulbs. not just the white balance goes wrong either. some of the exposures can become very darkened also. which makes raw a miracle.
here is a very amusing picture i fixed up to show my buddy the power of raw editing.
Forum Veteran
I have been shooting in jpeg, but it looks like I should switch to RAW. I have a picture similar to the "opossum butt" above that I have been unable to fix in PS Elements. I'm not sure if it is just my lack of ability though.
Does anyone have a guide to editing in RAW vs jpeg? Is it as simple as uploading RAW, editing, and then saving a jpeg version? And yes, I am a beginner.
Active Member
I have been shooting in jpeg, but it looks like I should switch to RAW. I have a picture similar to the "opossum butt" above that I have been unable to fix in PS Elements. I'm not sure if it is just my lack of ability though.
Does anyone have a guide to editing in RAW vs jpeg? Is it as simple as uploading RAW, editing, and then saving a jpeg version? And yes, I am a beginner.
yes, that is pretty much the process. lots more editing options with raw though. it saves much more data, even if you can't see it in the original photo.
Forum Veteran
yes, that is pretty much the process. lots more editing options with raw though. it saves much more data, even if you can't see it in the original photo.
Thanks. I am going to try taking some shots in RAW + jpeg and seeing what I can do. Hmm, maybe I should take some purposely dark photos to see if they are fixable.
Forum Veteran
You'll be shocked at how much information you can recover from under-exposed RAW files.
Forum Veteran
You'll be shocked at how much information you can recover from under-exposed RAW files.
Now I'm wondering what I've been missing. Is there any way I can find out if someone can "save" a jpeg that I think is not saveable? It is a chipmunk in a great pose, but just too dark, like the opossum butt.
Active Member
there was a fix my photo section the other day, but i no longer see it. if you want me to give it a shot, post it here or send it to me, and ill run it through for you to see what can be done.
Forum Veteran
Now I'm wondering what I've been missing. Is there any way I can find out if someone can "save" a jpeg that I think is not saveable? It is a chipmunk in a great pose, but just too dark, like the opossum butt.
Yeah, you are on a photography forum.. we'd all like to take a crack at it lol
Post up what you have and the forum collective can take a look!
New Member
I always shoot raw, but I can see how a photo journalist or sports photographer would possibly use JPEG to get photos faster. As a hobby photographer who mostly takes pictures of my family and uses Lightroom, RAW is really the only way to go.
Active Member
Forums
Sign In
Create Account
Back to top
Report
