anyone gone back to jpeg after shooting raw

I never shoot both at the same time. I just find that a waste of space. If I am shooting RAW I can generate the JPG file if I have to.

I wouldn't say that I have gone back to shooting JPG but I do shoot more sessions in JPG. I have started shooting more using my hand held light meter and that has resulted in exposures that are much more bang on.

RAW definitely has its place and I do shoot most of my wildlife and general scenics in this format. For sessions where I am using my studio lights I will switch to JPG and manual exposure. If you nail your exposure then shooting RAW doesn't have as much value.

Used to shoot in JPG, then RAW + JPG and now just in RAW

Why shoot RAW plus small JPEG when there is a small JPEG already imbedded in the RAW file?

The only time I shoot JPEG is for test shots, for quick instruction images or with my P&S.

I've gotten my RAW workflow to be as fast or faster than my jpeg workflow ever was, so I see no reason to ever shoot jpeg again.

Vinni wrote in post #3308942
RAW all the way. I just can't imagine going to JPG again, I'm too scared of the compression.

You shouldn't see compression artifacts unless you are printing very large from a camera stored JPG.

pturton wrote in post #3317961
Why shoot RAW plus small JPEG when there is a small JPEG already imbedded in the RAW file?

There is a JPG embedded in the RAW file so the camera can view an image, but it is heavily compressed. There might not be a way to extract the JPG and would be far simler to shoot RAW + something.

Why do people keep mentioning using raw+jpg so they can quickly review thier images? When I load my raw pics on my PC I can view/review quickly without any conversion to jpg. Whats the point of having the jpeg copy?

Sathi wrote in post #3318525
Why do people keep mentioning using raw+jpg so they can quickly review thier images? When I load my raw pics on my PC I can view/review quickly without any conversion to jpg. Whats the point of having the jpeg copy?

Get happy with the post button there?

Alot of times I'm shooting family/vacation/etc where others want to see the images right away. I find using jpeg to be much quicker (for me) for several reasons:

1) RAW in ACR/LR often needs processed to get colors/contrast, etc right... Jpeg from camera already has most of this right for quick viewing. Even in DPP the initial conversion can seem "flat" without a little bit of boost.

2) Easier to set up a simple slideshow for others to view, using almost any slideshow software.

3) When shooting at friend/relative's house who does not have RAW processing software already installed, and we wish to review the pictures.

While most of us here can probably look at a RAW image without adjustment and visualize how we can develop it... I don't expect others to be able to do that... they may often look at it and say the colors look off, or flat etc, and be distracted by that.

liza wrote in post #3308619
I'll never shoot JPEG again unless I borrow my child's P&S.

I prefer the greater bit depth of raw and the simple adjustment of WB and exposure. While I always strive to get the exposure correct by shooting manual, $h*t happens.

Ditto.

(echo)

I'll shoot either. I don't care either way. You can get EXCELLENT results from either. For paid shoots I usually shoot RAW, for everything else like personal vacation photos or birthday parties, it's all jpg.
The last wedding I shot one of my cameras was on jpg instead of raw by mistake. Oh well, who cares... the images aren't going to be any worse so it didn't bother me in the least.

picturecrazy wrote in post #3318795
I'll shoot either. I don't care either way. You can get EXCELLENT results from either. For paid shoots I usually shoot RAW, for everything else like personal vacation photos or birthday parties, it's all jpg.
The last wedding I shot one of my cameras was on jpg instead of raw by mistake. Oh well, who cares... the images aren't going to be any worse so it didn't bother me in the least.

Ditto

For snapshootin' - Jpeg, serious work - RAW.
Few weeks ago I've shoot a model, forgetting to switch back to RAW. Session was success, but I'd still prefer if I'd shoot it in RAW.

Cheers
Vlad

i'll never go back to jpeg.

The only time I ever shoot JPEG is when the quality of the picture has absolutely no importance to me whatsoever, which is almost never. An example of when I might use JPEG would be, if I were taking a picture of how some wires were hooked up before I dosconnected them for repair, or taking a picture of a part at work to show some condition to somebody in an email that would otherwise be hard to verbalize.
If it's a picture I'm taking for print, or just hobby, it's ALWAYS RAW!

Cubix Rube wrote in post #3319440
The only time I ever shoot JPEG is when the quality of the picture has absolutely no importance to me whatsoever, which is almost never. An example of when I might use JPEG would be, if I were taking a picture of how some wires were hooked up before I dosconnected them for repair, or taking a picture of a part at work to show some condition to somebody in an email that would otherwise be hard to verbalize.
If it's a picture I'm taking for print, or just hobby, it's ALWAYS RAW!

I even shoot those pics in RAW. For instance, when I got my last hard drive I took pics of the serial/model number etc on the label before it went into my computer. I will probably never do anything with the shot, but it is a RAW file.

Hard Drive serial numbers in RAW? Ugly wiring setups in RAW? Quick snaps for email in RAW? Are you joking??

So the term L-snob has been coined here.

Is there such a thing as RAW-snob?? LOL

I went out and took some Raw pics... and then I found that my computer let me download them, but I couldn't even view them. I tried opening them in Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 and it would only let me change basic things... (color and contrast) couldn't edit them to the extent I need to. I have only shot jpeg and I REALLY want to swich after reading this forum! Is there something vital I need to change? Someone help please.