RAWs and Jpegs

And denying that shooting both gives you the best of both worlds . . .

Actually, it is that simple and easy. XNView lets you view your raw files as thumbnails. Scroll through an entire folder, then double click on a thumb to view full frame. Zoom in if you wish. Right click and open in your editor of choice, or use XNView for editing. This little program is also available as a portable app.

But does it extract the JPEG from the RAW file?

Ltdave wrote in post #17767989
when i first started shooting my canon dslr, i didnt understand RAWs and i didnt see much difference in editing using canons DPP software so i shot Jpegs...

listening to those who are more knowledgeable than myself convinced me to shoot RAWs and i subsequently purchased PSE10 and LR5 (now upgraded to 5.6 i think?) and i really REALLY like the ability to do what i can with these programs to post process my images and i think im getting better at getting my images right SOOC...

heres my question. i continued to shoot jpegs and RAWs because i found it easier to open the jpegs in MS photo/viewer (the default windows application) if i wanted a quick easy look through but now im at the point where i hardly EVER do anything with the Jpegs in my files....

3 questions:

how many shooters here still shoot both?

if you shoot both do you keep the jpegs for any length of time?

if you decide to delete the jpegs, is there a method of selecting them by "type of file" vs clicking every single one of them for deletion?

I started out in 2003 shooting dslr and jpegs. Had a spell trying raw shooting over couple years then did a few events whereby we shoot the image, it goes back to the server/laptop/printer, gets printed and the punter hands over the money. Raw was too slow and it clogged up the flow so we shot jpegs. I worked with an event guy who explained to me the exact specs he set up his cameras and I followed his example with saturation,sharpness and contrast.

We worked together for quite some time on and off and all he looked for was a 1mb file to print a 7x5" image off Fujitsu portable printers and I still follow that way of working today. I buy my cameras based on their jpeg performance and I haven't purchased editing software since about 2006.

It's the way I enjoy still banging out thousands of images a year. Set the camera according to what I want on the days and hey, presto out comes what I want. If I started to edit in raw I would become disillusioned and probably pack it all in thereby losing what is sometimes a quite lucrative 2nd work line.

Ok, I know what you guys produce from raw files and best of luck to ya. That's a choice you make and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Me, I'd prefer to spend an hour creating an ideal scene, wait for the moment of light and if it doesn't work out, well there's another day. Jpegs can be edited to a small degree if we're careful and in the last few months bought a colormeter and that makes shooting under artificial light very enjoyable now.

Even tho I still shoot raw+jpeg for the occasional weddings I do, the look I get from sooc jpegs makes me happy and so quick!

longbeachgary wrote in post #17772501
I'm not sure why all the hate towards jpeg. How does it hurt to shoot both?

No hate; it's just not always appropriate for what some of us shoot.

JPEG is great if you can nail the exposure and color right in the camera. For a lot of what I shoot, this just isn't possible.

JPEG is great if you're going to deliver an unedited file, or print an unedited file. I sometimes do a photo booth, and DSLRBooth won't even accept anything other than jpeg right from the camera.

LincsRP wrote in post #17773271
I started out in 2003 shooting dslr and jpegs. Had a spell trying raw shooting over couple years then did a few events whereby we shoot the image, it goes back to the server/laptop/printer, gets printed and the punter hands over the money. Raw was too slow and it clogged up the flow so we shot jpegs. I worked with an event guy who explained to me the exact specs he set up his cameras and I followed his example with saturation,sharpness and contrast.

We worked together for quite some time on and off and all he looked for was a 1mb file to print a 7x5" image off Fujitsu portable printers and I still follow that way of working today. I buy my cameras based on their jpeg performance and I haven't purchased editing software since about 2006.

It's the way I enjoy still banging out thousands of images a year. Set the camera according to what I want on the days and hey, presto out comes what I want. If I started to edit in raw I would become disillusioned and probably pack it all in thereby losing what is sometimes a quite lucrative 2nd work line.

Ok, I know what you guys produce from raw files and best of luck to ya. That's a choice you make and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Me, I'd prefer to spend an hour creating an ideal scene, wait for the moment of light and if it doesn't work out, well there's another day. Jpegs can be edited to a small degree if we're careful and in the last few months bought a colormeter and that makes shooting under artificial light very enjoyable now.

Even tho I still shoot raw+jpeg for the occasional weddings I do, the look I get from sooc jpegs makes me happy and so quick!

Good post, thanks.

There are a lot of things I like about RAW, but probably the main thing is being able to salvage detail in highlights and shadows that would be lost in JPEGs.

I lied. It was a CP8000DW Mitsubishi printer as it sits behind me in my workshop right now. We started out with a HiTi 730PS event printer which has a 2" square screen to view the image before printing. Strewth did that printer earn us some money ...

Originally I started with a Canon CP300 printer shooting Father Christmas events - three clicks, choose image, print, take monies. Worked in many venues and produced a 6x4" postcard. Worked well but, it had to be jpegs.

So it should be obvious that there's a place for jpegs and there's place for raw. You just have to work it out for yourselves which works in the situation you're faced with.

Personally I think jpegs rule ....

Did I just destroy my credability ... yeah, course I did

LincsRP wrote in post #17773546
Did I just destroy my credability ... yeah, course I did

Only in the fine arts field. Within the soul crushing rapid churning to push out the same thing over and over again for fun and profit? Well there you're basically god like.

ebiggs wrote in post #17772403
There you have a point! No denying RAW files are huge.

There is why I left a tiny justification for a jpg. Otherwise the RAW converting process is seamless anymore. Even in a hotel room on a laptop. Been there, done that. If you are going to post them to social, FB or the like you need to do a small amount of editing or at least look at what you want to share.
If size becomes a big deal shoot mRAW or even sRAW. A much better choice in my estimation. But that is only me, free advice and worth every penny.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17770978
A ciouple of things to keep in mind:

1) Each raw file of late model Canon cameras contains the full size JPG as part of the payload, and you can use some free 3rd party tools that will extract the JPG out should you ever just need JPG..

When did this change? The embedded JPG preview in the past has always been a limited resolution portrayal suitable for chimping on the camera LCD and for extracting display of blinking blown pixels.

texkam wrote in post #17772852
Actually, it is that simple and easy. XNView lets you view your raw files as thumbnails. Scroll through an entire folder, then double click on a thumb to view full frame. Zoom in if you wish. Right click and open in your editor of choice, or use XNView for editing. This little program is also available as a portable app.

Sure, if it happens to be on the computer you're using, or you can load the portable app onto that computer. And then you still have to extract the file to be able to email/share it. No, it's not as simple and easy as shooting RAW + JPEG is. I can do exactly the same things XNView does using IrfanView (including run it as a portable app), but that's still not as easy as having the JPEG right there on the camera's memory card from the moment I press the shutter.

I started seriously a little over 2 years ago. I was told to shoot raw, so I did. I've never recorded a jpeg in all this time! Don't know what I'm missing, I guess.

LincsRP wrote in post #17773271
I started out in 2003 shooting dslr and jpegs. Had a spell trying raw shooting over couple years then did a few events whereby we shoot the image, it goes back to the server/laptop/printer, gets printed and the punter hands over the money. Raw was too slow and it clogged up the flow so we shot jpegs. I worked with an event guy who explained to me the exact specs he set up his cameras and I followed his example with saturation,sharpness and contrast.

We worked together for quite some time on and off and all he looked for was a 1mb file to print a 7x5" image off Fujitsu portable printers and I still follow that way of working today. I buy my cameras based on their jpeg performance and I haven't purchased editing software since about 2006.

It's the way I enjoy still banging out thousands of images a year. Set the camera according to what I want on the days and hey, presto out comes what I want. If I started to edit in raw I would become disillusioned and probably pack it all in thereby losing what is sometimes a quite lucrative 2nd work line.

Ok, I know what you guys produce from raw files and best of luck to ya. That's a choice you make and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Me, I'd prefer to spend an hour creating an ideal scene, wait for the moment of light and if it doesn't work out, well there's another day. Jpegs can be edited to a small degree if we're careful and in the last few months bought a colormeter and that makes shooting under artificial light very enjoyable now.

Even tho I still shoot raw+jpeg for the occasional weddings I do, the look I get from sooc jpegs makes me happy and so quick!

This is one of the few situations, where speed and ease trump everything, in an often relatively controlled situation, especially if you are able to light the situation, where shooting JPEG is the sensible option. I would think that in some of these photo booth type situations you don't even keep the JPEG files long term either. Once the customer has the print that is pretty much job done. These sorts of situations were the sort of thing where in the pre digital days the customer might have ended up with a Polaroid print of little Jonny on Santa's knee, if they got a photo at all.

Alan

This might have changed with the 5d2 or so.

Also here is a pretty good article on what raw gives you over jpg....
http://www.slrlounge.c​om …he-ultimate-visual-guide/

The CR2 file is an encapsulated TIFF file with 4 different sections or IFDs (image file directory). I think the first IFD contains the EXIF data, shooting parameters and dust delete data. The last IFD contains lossless JPG data containing the gray scale bayer sensor data. In the first 3 IFDs are different JPG renderings. I believe now, where there used to be a small JPG in one of those IFDs, there is now a full-sized rendering.