Shooting a wedding in RAW or JPG?

[Columbus Photo]

I am New to the DSLR world and am still not very fluent in PSCS. I have a wedding to shoot in May. Because of not being comfortable shooting in RAW should I shoot the wedding in Large JPG? I know the option is there to shoot RAW+JPG but wouldn't I have to double my amount of memory I use? I am currently spending as much time as possible getting to know PS and the camera(20d) because of the editing importance! Thank you for all comments!

[defordphoto]

Sounds like you're in waaaay over your head...

You have ALOT of practicing to do before the event with proper lighting, staging and so much more, because you ALWAYS shoot weddings in RAW for the little buffer space it gives you.

[FlyingPete]

This is a good chance to learn RAW.

I would defiantly shoot RAW. As for the JPG, when I do portrait work, and I am doing a wedding in two weeks, I will also use these settings, I use a medium JPG, mainly for quick sorting of good and bad shots.

As a wedding is a one off, i.e. no second chances, RAW will give you more latitude for errors, especially white balance issues. It is one less thing to worry about on the day.

RAW processing is not that hard in either Photoshop or Photo Professional, actually I find it quite fun! Put half an hour aside shoot some RAW and have a play, you will be hooked!

As for other wedding things, not sure if this is your first, but her some thoughts:
-Take lots of memory as you are shooting RAW
-Try and get a spare camera body
-Spare batteries for both camera and flash (if you are using one)
-Don’t forget to diffuse your flash if you are going external, wither bounce it if you had a good white ceiling (rare in churches), or get a diffuser
-Get that rapid fire for the candid moments, I find that the best shots from the day are usually the candid shots
-Relax and don’t p*ss off the bride!

[FlyingPete]

Sounds like you're in waaaay over your head...

You have ALOT of practicing to do before the event with proper lighting, staging and so much more, because you ALWAYS shoot weddings in RAW for the little buffer space it gives you.

Actually this is a good point. Weddings are not a good place to practice your skills if you are a sole photographer. You have only one chance at it, and screwing it up will make you very unpopular.

I have now done enough to get good results now, but I still don't do work for people I know as 'favours' incase things go deep brown and smelly, bye bye any friendships there.

If you are not the official photographer, then go have fun, and take advantage of the excellent oportunity to practice.

BTW, when you are the offcial photographer it is a high stress situation, after I did my forst, I didn't do another for three years, even though the couple loved their photos.

[Columbus Photo]

I feel confident I can shoot in RAW fine and no this is not my first wedding. I have mentored another photgrapher of 20+ yrs and have done a few weddings with him. I just am not fluent with the importance of RAW yet but I will make sure from your post I spend the time understanding it better! I just need some opinions on the importance of this! Thank you!

[cmM]

there are 2 types of light in churches and banquet halls etc: bad, and worse :D

I say, God bless RAW! I wouldn't dare shoot anything else. It gives you infinitely more flexibility when it comes to things like exposure, WB, etc...

[Columbus Photo]

there are 2 types of light in churches and banquet halls etc: bad, and worse :D

I say, God bless RAW! I wouldn't dare shoot anything else. It gives you infinitely more flexibility when it comes to things like exposure, WB, etc...

LOL! From what I have gathered so far from the bride and groom most of the "formals" will be done outside! That is if the weather permits! I appreciate all the suggestions and comments!

[FlyingPete]

I feel confident I can shoot in RAW fine and no this is not my first wedding. I have mentored another photgrapher of 20+ yrs and have done a few weddings with him. I just am not fluent with the importance of RAW yet but I will make sure from your post I spend the time understanding it better! I just need some opinions on the importance of this! Thank you!

Nice sounds like you have the rest under control! RAW will give you more abilty to fix exposure issues, and is invaluable for white balance. Also generally the quality of the finished product from the converter is better than the JPG's from the camera.

Here is an example of a 'serious' shot I had to do for a mag cover both images cropped at 100% no post processing other than RAW conversion on the second copy. In this case the JPG was full resolution; I have stopped doing this to save space on my cards. The background was removed later warmed a little and superimposed on another image, Auto White Balance used, exposure set from the palm of my hand (poor mans grey card!):
http://www.lowden.orcon.net.nz/JPG.jpg
JPG straight out of the camera

http://www.lowden.orcon.net.nz/RAW.jpg
Processed RAW using Photoshop CS RAW converter

Spot the difference!

[Columbus Photo]

Wow! very BIG difference! I think it will be very beneficial to get a few more gigs and shoot raw and jpg! JPG to view and disperse the pictures quick that I don't need and RAW to complete the final processing.

[tim]

That's just changing the white ballance isn't it? The pic looks a bit out of focus to me.

[FlyingPete]

That's just changing the white ballance isn't it? The pic looks a bit out of focus to me.

Changed the White Balance and the actual conversion is better, as when I did the conversion with the 'as-shot' white balance it still looked better.

As for it being out of focus, probably because the crops are 100%, so you are actually seeing the pixels. Shot with a Nifty Fifty af f/8, I am yet to see an image that is tack sharp at 100%, then again I don't own any L glass, I put up with it, as in reality I rarely notice it, and it is bank balce depleting to try and resolve it. Looks fine zoomed out, the magazine people actually downsampled it quite dar for the front of an A4 magazine, there is way more detail in the above images than in the mag.

[tim]

I think you're right, it's just because it's a crop.

I must get some L glass some time, i've seem some wikked photos with amazing detail that i'd love to be able to do.

Incidentally, 4 hours sleep isn't enough to go on for an entire day, it seems.

[Moments]

I feel confident I can shoot in RAW fine and no this is not my first wedding. I have mentored another photgrapher of 20+ yrs and have done a few weddings with him. I just am not fluent with the importance of RAW yet but I will make sure from your post I spend the time understanding it better! I just need some opinions on the importance of this! Thank you!

Have you shot a wedding by yourself before? Or have you just worked as an assistant on a few? Do you normally shoot on film or digital? I know this is not what you are asking for, but I would like to know.

As far as the importance of Raw verses JPG, lets put it this way. If you were able to shoot 35mm film and only have the camera expose 1/2 of the frame so you could get more exposures on the roll, would you? If you say you would put 72 frames on a roll of 36 if you could, then shoot in JPG, if not then shoot in Raw. Simply put, Raw gives you control over your images at its most raw format. What is the issue you have with understanding Raw? If you need to make an adjustment to the exposure, color, etc you can. What does that cost? Memory.

I only shoot candids and photojournalistic shots with my 20D always in Raw. I have had a few clients that quized me in reference to my digital shooting, and even if I shot in raw or jpg. I have had clients that were totally turned off to digital because of either a bad prior expirence or seeing bad digital work by other photographers.

One should really know what ones doing and how to do it before he does it and charges for it.

[tim]

Moments, that's an interesting analogy but I don't think it's the whole story. My photography teacher (a full time pro who teaches an occasional class) shoots JPG exclusively, because he's talented and experienced enough to get the image he wants in the camera. He doesn't do much digital work because he's good enough that he doesn't have time to do it. So RAW isn't necessary, but it gives flexability.

I shoot RAW for critical work and difficult lighting situations, and I expect to continue doing that for the foreseeable future.

[Moments]

Moments, that's an interesting analogy but I don't think it's the whole story. My photography teacher (a full time pro who teaches an occasional class) shoots JPG exclusively, because he's talented and experienced enough to get the image he wants in the camera. He doesn't do much digital work because he's good enough that he doesn't have time to do it. So RAW isn't necessary, but it gives flexability.

I shoot RAW for critical work and difficult lighting situations, and I expect to continue doing that for the foreseeable future.

I'm glad to hear that your teacher is good enough not to have to shoot in Raw. Tell you the truth, I shoot in raw, and most of the time, I do not have to make changes to the files before export, due to my mistakes or not being good enough.

I do find that I will have to sometimes adjust exposure when the 550ex is slow to charge or just plain off. Or like this weekend when one of my Photographers did not realize that he had his parameters changed on his 20D. All the settings were pumped up while he was testing them the day before a job. He forgot to set the camera back to normal. Only in Raw was I able to bring down the contrast and saturation and exported them as normal. When you are shooting a wedding it is importaint to have the flexability of Raw. Just like the fact that I shoot all my Formals with a Hasselblad because it blows away a 35mm neg when enlarging a print to 16x20 or larger. Another photographer that I know who shoots on 35mm says that she does not need to shoot with larger film because she does not get that many requests for prints larger than 8x10. Guess what, If she had great looking larger print samples, I bet she would sell them, I do with 90% of my jobs and then I custom frame apprx 30% - 50% of them.

BTW, I don't know what whole story you were talking about. I was responding to Columbus Photos questions on shooting Raw over Jpg for a wedding. From that question I think he should shoot in Raw.

[tim]

I agree with you, RAW is the way to go. I'm sure my teacher has dud shots too, everyone probably does. It'd be nice to be able to shoot with a Hasselblad, I don't have the skills or the funds to do that right now.

btw i'd had a couple of glasses of wine at work before my last post, so don't take it too seriously.

[KennyG]

Hmmm, a teacher so talented that he can't see how you can extract more detail from RAW than JPG because the better converters are far superior to any JPG conversion done in-camera. Wow, what a talent.

[Columbus Photo]

Have you shot a wedding by yourself before? Or have you just worked as an assistant on a few? Do you normally shoot on film or digital? I know this is not what you are asking for, but I would like to know.

As far as the importance of Raw verses JPG, lets put it this way. If you were able to shoot 35mm film and only have the camera expose 1/2 of the frame so you could get more exposures on the roll, would you? If you say you would put 72 frames on a roll of 36 if you could, then shoot in JPG, if not then shoot in Raw. Simply put, Raw gives you control over your images at its most raw format. What is the issue you have with understanding Raw? If you need to make an adjustment to the exposure, color, etc you can. What does that cost? Memory.

I only shoot candids and photojournalistic shots with my 20D always in Raw. I have had a few clients that quized me in reference to my digital shooting, and even if I shot in raw or jpg. I have had clients that were totally turned off to digital because of either a bad prior expirence or seeing bad digital work by other photographers.

One should really know what ones doing and how to do it before he does it and charges for it.

No I have not shot a wedding on my own, but I have to start sometime if I'm ever going to. Its nice to have a "tenured" professional to ask for advice at anytime and go to when needing assistance!
I have shot in 35mm, but the reason I was asking about raw and JPG is because I did not understand the full benefit of RAW. I have a better understanding now and will perfect myself in the use of it.
So I appreciate everybodies tips and advice everybody gives me on this! and I agree the cost of messing up a wedding is not worth the minor cost of memory. I will go more than prepared!
Thank you!

[tim]

Hmmm, a teacher so talented that he can't see how you can extract more detail from RAW than JPG because the better converters are far superior to any JPG conversion done in-camera. Wow, what a talent.

I don't find I get more detail from RAW, I find it gives me more flexability. Have you done head to head comparisons? I guess you could get a little more detail from RAW, not a huge amount though.

I think he does formal stuff with film cameras, perhaps even medium format, so the digital ones usually won't be blown up huge.

[Todd Jacobsen]

I don't find I get more detail from RAW, I find it gives me more flexability. Have you done head to head comparisons? I guess you could get a little more detail from RAW, not a huge amount though.

I think he does formal stuff with film cameras, perhaps even medium format, so the digital ones usually won't be blown up huge.

I always shoot Fine Jpeg + RAW and I find that unless I get the White Balance wrong, the camera does a pretty damn good job of processing for me.

But getting the WB right is not always easy, and room to room adjustments are easy to forget. AWB does okay, but not always. I find my indoor shots really benefit from a gray card check in PS. If you don't have Photoshop, then using CWB with center metering, and a coffee filter (or Expodisc) is recommended.

Since indoor lighting is room to room, a shot with a gray card per room is really helpful. Using RAW, you can apply the setting you corrected in the gray card shot.