Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk
Thread started 18 Feb 2010 (Thursday) 11:08
Prev/next
Poll"Pro Sports Shooters: RAW or JPEG?"
RAW
82
52.2%
JPEG
75
47.8%

157 voters, 157 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Pro Sports Shooters: RAW or JPEG?

 
BenJohnson
Goldmember
BenJohnson's Avatar
1,811 posts
Joined Dec 2008
Minneapolis, MN
Feb 18, 2010 11:08 |  #1

I shoot sporting events and sell prints (on and off site). I shoot all sporting events in JPEG.

I am mostly interested in photographers that take hundreds, or more likely, thousands of shots a day (print sellers).

Not so much the casual shooters, or the newspapers guys who only need to grab a handful of workable shots.

If you shoot some of both, I guess you can just vote for whichever you use the most.

What percentage of (pro) sports shooters use JPEG and what percentage use RAW?


|Ben Johnson Photographyexternal link|
|Gear List|

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
SnapLocally.com
Goldmember
SnapLocally.com's Avatar
1,728 posts
Joined May 2007
Feb 18, 2010 11:15 |  #2

The last time I met a professional sports photographer that came and shot boxing at one of the events I regularly shoot, he told me he was shooting in RAW, and I laughed at him. I said "Have fun processing all of those shots", and he was shooting with 3 cameras.

My philosophy works just fine for me- "Get the shot right the first time- there's no retakes", and I make prints too; posters even.


www.SnapLocally.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
NickJushchyshyn
Senior Member
289 posts
Joined Sep 2008
Philadelphia, PA
Feb 18, 2010 13:59 |  #3

Same here. For sports action, JPG all the way. It's not just a space & processing time issue, but also a shooting speed concern on the field. The 1D bodies can easily shoot faster than even high-speed Lexar cards can keep up with RAW when their's a flurry of action to capture. The camera buffers keep up fine in JPG mode, but RAW can slow things down and result in missed shots.

For portraits and family stuff, its RAW only for me ... but not for sports shooting.


www.techvantics.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
DDCSD
GIVIN' GOOD KARMA
DDCSD's Avatar
13,313 posts
Joined Jun 2007
South Dakota
Feb 18, 2010 14:11 |  #4

I shoot RAW, even for weekend tourney's where I'm shooting 2-3,000 shots a weekend. I don't upload anything to my website that I don't look at and at often straighten the horizons (and usually crop), so I may as well shoot in RAW. It also isn't always possible to get my strobes perfectly even, so I'll sometimes need to adjust exposure and pull down some highlights. I also resize my photos before I upload them to my website.

With LightRoom 2 its easy enough to import RAWs, fix and export as jpg's that I really don't see any advantage to shooting just jpg other than memory card and hard drive space and those are both cheap these days.


Derek
Bucketman Karma Fund
http://photography-on-the.net ...php?p=9903477#post9​903477
POTN FF L2 MadTown Birds


Full Gear List & Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
SnapLocally.com
Goldmember
SnapLocally.com's Avatar
1,728 posts
Joined May 2007
Feb 18, 2010 14:58 |  #5

Conversely I don't see the advantage in shooting in RAW when I've taken the time to prepare and make sure my settings are correct in the first place.


www.SnapLocally.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
int2str
Goldmember
1,881 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Fremont, CA
Feb 18, 2010 15:07 as a reply to SnapLocally.com's post |  #6

I just read this quote from Peter Read Miller (Sports Illustrated):
"I shoot RAW only so I pretty much ignore many of the settings that pertain to image quality for JPEGs."

From here:
http://www.sportsshoot​er.com/news/2371external link

Personally, I shoot raw only as well. I don't see the difference anymore to be honest, other than maybe download and rendering times. When I shot JPEGs, I still go through each one, crop as necessary and tweak sharpness, exposure etc. and then save. So there's no real difference for me since I at least briefly brush by each image.

And honestly, maybe I'm just a lousy photographer (may very well be), but I haven't shot a photo in a while that couldn't at least slightly be improved by a minor crop or slight sharpening.




LOG IN TO REPLY
mmahoney
Goldmember
mmahoney's Avatar
2,789 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Feb 18, 2010 15:23 |  #7

I'm really a wedding photographer but in the winter we shoot youth basketball & hockey tournaments. A typical 3 day tournament will see me shoot 4,000+ frames and all are RAW. We have the computers and software setups to manage larger quantities of big files so why not?

All our sales are prepaid and usually larger prints, 11X14 and 16X20. All are processed, and many are cut-outs to form collages so we need as high a quality original file as possible. But if I was doing the shoot-a-ton-on-spec-upload-to-SmugMug thing then I'd shoot JPEG.


Newfoundland Wedding Photographerexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
DDCSD
GIVIN' GOOD KARMA
DDCSD's Avatar
13,313 posts
Joined Jun 2007
South Dakota
Feb 18, 2010 15:37 |  #8

SnapLocally.com wrote in post #9635059external link
Conversely I don't see the advantage in shooting in RAW when I've taken the time to prepare and make sure my settings are correct in the first place.

I'm sure its nice to shoot in conditions where you can get perfect framing, exposure and white balance that allows you an 85-90% saleable shot rate on 3,000 shots. Until I shoot in those situations or become a competent photographer, I'm stuck with shooting RAW so I can supply my customers with the highest quality product posible.


Derek
Bucketman Karma Fund
http://photography-on-the.net ...php?p=9903477#post9​903477
POTN FF L2 MadTown Birds


Full Gear List & Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
SnapLocally.com
Goldmember
SnapLocally.com's Avatar
1,728 posts
Joined May 2007
Feb 18, 2010 16:13 |  #9

I'm sure its nice to shoot in conditions where you can get perfect framing, exposure and white balance that allows you an 85-90% saleable shot rate on 3,000 shots.

Obviously you've never shot boxing.


www.SnapLocally.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
J.Napier
Senior Member
J.Napier's Avatar
886 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Washington State
Feb 19, 2010 00:14 |  #10

It depends. On the event or if Im shooting for myself or for someone else, but for the most part its jpeg (for sports action) as thats the only way I can get photos up to the masses 3-4 minutes after they are shot.
The software that I use works with jpegs.


Jeff
Gear List
www.jni-ss.com /external linkBlogexternal link
Sportshooterpageexternal link / Maxprepsexternal link
Facebook external link/

LOG IN TO REPLY
canonnoob
Cream of the Crop
canonnoob's Avatar
8,487 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Atlanta, GA
Feb 19, 2010 00:18 |  #11

I do shoot RAW, but the only time I dont is if I am on an extreme deadline. Like this weekend for example. I am shooting the State Wrestling Championships here in Missouri and I will be doing run after run after run to the media room if I shoot RAW so Jpeg it is.


David W.

LOG IN TO REPLY
DDCSD
GIVIN' GOOD KARMA
DDCSD's Avatar
13,313 posts
Joined Jun 2007
South Dakota
Feb 19, 2010 00:18 |  #12

SnapLocally.com wrote in post #9635561external link
Obviously you've never shot boxing.

Obviously you've never heard of sarcasm. ;)

My point is that when you shoot basketball in a typical gymnasium, you're going to get a different exposure and color temperature every time you trip the shutter. I've had a more than one stop difference in between consecutive shots when the only thing that changed was the cycle of the lights.

There is no way to "prepare and make sure my settings are correct in the first place." when the settings you use for one shot is one full stop and 1000K different 1/10th of a second later. It simply isn't possible, no one is that good.

I'm not going to sell my customers an inferior product or throw away half of my shots because I'm too lazy to do some quick processing in RAW.

I need to get 60-100 salable shots per basketball game. When I'm shooting a tourney, I'm shooting 2,3 and sometimes 4 games at a time. It's a lot easier to "get it right" in camera and have plenty of salable shots when you're shooting 2 people at a time as compared to 30-50.

I need every shot to count, regardless of what the laws of electricity are.


Derek
Bucketman Karma Fund
http://photography-on-the.net ...php?p=9903477#post9​903477
POTN FF L2 MadTown Birds


Full Gear List & Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
primoz
POTN Sports Photographer of the year 2005
primoz's Avatar
2,532 posts
Joined Dec 2004
Anywhere where ski World cup makes its stop
Feb 19, 2010 03:29 as a reply to int2str's post |  #13

Shooting for Reuters is "a bit" different then shooting for SI. As far as SI is concerned, they could still be shooting film, and noone would care. SI is published what, once a week/month? So you have plenty of time to upload your photos. Agencies on the other side need photos yesterday, not after 15mins from now on.
So no, I don't shoot 3000 photos on one race/match, but I do shoot for agency where it would be best, if photos would be there 10mins ago already. So even minute or two (but in reality much more then just a minute) which I save when I don't need to convert raw to jpeg (including time gained because of handling smaller size files) plays big role. And it's big enough thing, that I don't even consider shooting raw.


PhotoSIexternal link | Latest sport photosexternal linkhttp://www.photo.siexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
RSB
Senior Member
317 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Carlsbad, CA
Feb 19, 2010 10:37 as a reply to SnapLocally.com's post |  #14

I've never seen a perfect jpeg straight out of camera, no matter how "right the photographer thought he had it in the camera when he shot it". Quite simply, every single image capture can be improved in post processing, and that improvement is best done to a Raw capture.


Randy Brister, Cr.Photog.

LOG IN TO REPLY
SnapLocally.com
Goldmember
SnapLocally.com's Avatar
1,728 posts
Joined May 2007
Feb 19, 2010 10:48 |  #15

Not every single shot is worth processing. And of those taken correctly, minimal processing is needed.


www.SnapLocally.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

17,424 views & 6 likes for this thread
Pro Sports Shooters: RAW or JPEG?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00346 for 5 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
Latest registered member is BHillier89
925 guests, 443 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016