RAW vs JPG

[imanewbie]

Hey, everyone...

What are your thoughts on RAW vs JPG... when do you tend to use one or the other? Or do you use one of them exclusively?

It's all a bit confusing to me, so I need some real life examples/opinions, if you don't mind.

I have a Pro1.

Thanks so much!

[PacAce]

If you do a search of the "Post processing and printing" forum with the key words "RAW and JPEG", you'll get several hits of posts that'll answer your question.

[tim]

I'm gona answer anyway.

I use RAW where it's low light, difficult conditions, or I can't be bothered playing with the white ballance. They take a lot more processing on the PC, but the processed picture always comes out better, especially in low light.

[robertwgross]

I've had my D60 for something over two years now, and I can say that I have never shot a JPEG. 100% RAW.

---Bob Gross---

[sdommin]

I like the response to this question that I heard somewhere else:

"If you have to ask, shoot JPG."

I think that says it all.

[Steven M. Anthony]

I only shoot jpeg when I want to print right away on my little Epson Picturemate--like at my in-law's 50th wedding anniversary party. I shot a bunch of photos, printed them in triplicate and never had to deal with them again (the pictures, not the in-laws). Otherwise, I shoot RAW.

[aam1234]

"If you have to ask, shoot JPG."

I thought pros shoot jpeg only :rolleyes:

[Steven M. Anthony]

I like the response to this question that I heard somewhere else:

"If you have to ask, shoot JPG."

I think that says it all.

I think what imanewbie did was better. He/she felt like asking to learn something rather than to be told a knowledge-limiting quip.

[Scottes]

Yes, many do. But if you have to ask which to use, shoot JPG. The pros know why they're shooting JPG.

[Steven M. Anthony]

Yes, many do. But if you have to ask which to use, shoot JPG. The pros know why they're shooting JPG.

I guess I just don't get it. To me, if you have to ask, the answer is to find out and then make your own decision.

[CyberDyneSystems]

RAW will offer the highest level of image quality and file integrity of the two.

Photography, like most things in life,. is about compromise. With Digital,. jpeg is one of those compromises that one can make. But unike the compromise of a Pro1 Vs. a 1Ds MkII... shooting RAW won;t cost you anything more than just learning a few tricks on your PC.

So it's a compromise I never really understood ;)

Here are some of the links ;
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/search.php?searchid=21102

Also,. check out;
http://www.rogercavanagh.com/helpinfo/35_rawor-1.stm

[tim]

RAW costs you time.

[Belmondo]

Every time you save a file in JPEG, you lose data. I assume that process starts the first time you save it in the camera.

I,for one, prefer to shoot the image using RAW and convert to lossless TIFF. Images that are going to be posted will be converted to JPEG.

Storage is so cheap these days.........

[Steven M. Anthony]

There are plusses and minuses for RAW and JPG. On the plus side for RAW is image quality, robustness and the ability to finely modify the image prior to conversion; on the minus side, there is increased data storage and processing time.

On the plus side for JPG are the inverse of the RAW negatives--with JPG, there is less strain on data storage resources and processing can be quicker than with RAW (unless you screw up--then it would likely be quicker to fix it in RAW, during conversion). The minus side of JPG is the inverse of RAW positives--lower quality, less robust, no ability to finely control modifications made to the image prior to editing.

What works for you depends on what's inportant for you on a given shoot.

[CyberDyneSystems]

RAW costs you time.

It may cost YOU time.. but not me.. my RAW workfloww is much quicker than when I shot jpeg..

It Does cost you time to learn it it though.. but then .. so does everything that is worthwhile in life ;)

[Spec]

Hey, everyone...

What are your thoughts on RAW vs JPG... when do you tend to use one or the other? Or do you use one of them exclusively?

It's all a bit confusing to me, so I need some real life examples/opinions, if you don't mind.

I have a Pro1.

Thanks so much!

"Every time you save a file in JPEG, you lose data. I assume that process starts the first time you save it in the camera."

This is not so using PhotoShop 6.0
As long as you save at the highest level (#12) the size of the file does not decrease even after numerous alterations to the picture (except "crop" of course) and then saving as a jpeg file.

[tim]

It may cost YOU time.. but not me.. my RAW workfloww is much quicker than when I shot jpeg..

It Does cost you time to learn it it though.. but then .. so does everything that is worthwhile in life ;)

With jpg I tend to crop and alter the levels, and photoshop's very quick doing that. With RAW the file browsers not very quick, you have more control, but it takes longer - but does look better too. If my PC were faster it wouldn't make much difference... but it's not.

I tried C1 but it didn't seem to give me as much control as PS CS.

[Jesper]

Here is some information about the advantages of RAW.
Go to this website: http://www.epaperpress.com/psphoto/index.html
and click "Raw Advantage" in the menu on the left.

[KennyG]

RAW costs you time.

I stongly disagree. A good RAW workflow leaves JPG in the dust. I use C1 and then PS for those rare times when something needs that bit extra adjustment. I can rip through 1,500 RAW files from a day's shoot much quicker than is possible with JPG.

[tim]

I put jpg up with very little processing, as white ballance and sharpening are done in-camera. I do levels and cropping is about it. With RAW I do more. C1 is really quick, but i've gone back to PS CS because it seems to give me more control.

I'm not a pro though, and i've not very experienced yet.

[Longwatcher]

You have to chose? 8)

I shoot both unless I need to take a lot of pictures at max speed for as long as possible, then I go jpeg (medium or small).

Other then that I am not willing to take the risk that I got that one-in-a-million shot and can't enlarge/enhance it to the max or fix it.

RAW does take more effort then just jpeg, but with my 10D, I just extracted the jpegs into a separate file and had both available. With my new toy, I have both available as sparate files from the time I down load from my camera.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Also.. with the 1D MkI and 20D (don't know about 1DsII yet) if you shoot just RAW... (not raw and jpeg) you still get a half res jpeg embedded whether you ask for it or not.

Oddly the only rogram that can extract this half res jpeg (that I know of) is BreezeBrowser.

So I now only shoot raw.. if I need quick jpegs for web or email,. I extract the small jpeg embedded in the RAW file.

[Jesper]

Also.. with the 1D MkI and 20D (don't know about 1DsII yet) if you shoot just RAW... (not raw and jpeg) you still get a half res jpeg embedded whether you ask for it or not.

Oddly the only rogram that can extract this half res jpeg (that I know of) is BreezeBrowser.Canon's software (at least File Viewer Utility and EOS Viewer Utility) can do this too (menu File / Extract and Save JPEG).

[Belmondo]

It looks like we all learned something today. Thanks, Jesper.

[PacAce]

Canon's software (at least File Viewer Utility and EOS Viewer Utility) can do this too (menu File / Extract and Save JPEG).

I thought I tried this the other day using EVU (FVU does not recognize 1DmkII raw) with the 1DmkII raw file and couldn't get it to work. But I do know for a fact that it does work with the 10D raw files.