Hey Sports Shooters!!

There's a free download that converts RAW files to jpeg in seconds; even hundreds of them. That would save you a little space on the "+jpeg" option.

Big K wrote in post #9094553
I hadn't used an enlarger in probably 15 years.

I haven't used one yet.

Ah, you talking still about photography, yes?

SnapLocally.com wrote in post #9095576
There's a free download that converts RAW files to jpeg in seconds; even hundreds of them. That would save you a little space on the "+jpeg" option.

There's RAW-converters and RAW-converters. There's huge difference on the quality.

For me, for first 5 years I had RAW-capable camera, I kept shooting in JPEG. The reason: although I understood the benefit of RAW (few more bits, a bit more dynamic range and WB correction), all the tests I did I ended up better pictures with JPEG. Why? Because my POS PC was so slow, that if I took the RAW, it took ages to PP it so basically I didn't do much. For JPEG, it was so much faster and easier, I spent the time editing instead of waiting, so I actually improved the JPEG quality much more as I didn't get frustrated waiting. Also I can't recall missing a good photo once for bad WB, so there wasn't really any benefit for using RAW, instead it seemed to hinder my PP.

Then I got new PC about 1 year ago, and I got Bibble the same time. Again I tried RAW, and I shot funny pictures with difficult lighting conditions. For one, the new PC with Bibble was about as fast as old PC w/ JPEG, so I didn't feel I was wasting time. (Of course new PC w/JPEG was even faster now). Also I noticed that even I had WB correct, the dynamic range helped me in rare cases where there were huge contrasts in the picture. So in most cases, I'd say 95% of the pictures don't matter if it's JPEG or RAW, but as there's no downside to using RAW, I've set my camera now to RAW+JPEG (fine), although 99.9% of the pics I PP from RAW.

I have the Rebel XTi (400D), and the RAW is about 15MB each. So far in 1 year of shooting RAW I've taken some 120GB of pics, but external HDs are cheap so it doesn't matter. I even duplicate the HDs in case one of them fails. And I never delete any of the originals, or the PPd JPEGs out from Bibble. They are all in the external drives, in case I need to go back to check something.

I don't shoot for work, only as a hobby. On my travels, I seem to average about 100pics/day, and now I've taken kendo photography, I've taken about 700-800 pics in ~6-7h event. I have 24GB of cards so they cover quite nice.

So, I'm sure I'd be happy with JPEG alone, but as there's no negative impact (save camera buffer) on RAW, I don't see why I wouldn't use it.

tpatana wrote in post #9104015
there's no negative impact (save camera buffer) on RAW, I don't see why I wouldn't use it.

missed shots = negative impact

SnapLocally.com wrote in post #9104104
missed shots = negative impact

+1
Shooting RAW + JPEG (short bursts in basketball) on my 1DII, I find myself waiting a lot on the buffer. I think I pushed the body too much, today, because I got an error 99 displayed. This is a first time for me and I need to search what the heck that means

SnapLocally.com wrote in post #9104104
missed shots = negative impact

Like I said, no negative impact save the camera buffer.

My camera takes 10 RAWs to buffer at the max fps (~3fps) until it's full. For my use, if I think at least a bit how I take pictures, I never get the buffer full, so it's really minor impact for me. For someone else, it could be bigger issue, especially with those 8-10fps cameras.

Sibil wrote in post #9104293
+1
Shooting RAW + JPEG (short bursts in basketball) on my 1DII, I find myself waiting a lot on the buffer. I think I pushed the body too much, today, because I got an error 99 displayed. This is a first time for me and I need to search what the heck that means

Error 99 is the general error code the camera uses when it knows something is wrong but doesn't know exactly what is wrong. In a lot of cases, Error 99 is caused by dirty lens/body contacts or battery grips.

I shoot mostly sports. When I purchased my camera 2 years ago, I started off shooting all jpg. Then after a few months, I switched to RAW. Since then, I only shoot in RAW. It provides so much flexibility later on for adjusting exposure, white balance, etc. I use DPP and have developed a workflow that makes the process of going through the pictures, editing them, cropping them, and then converting them to jpg's pretty quick. With RAW, I definitely have to delete unwanted pictures from the harddrive to preserve storage space.
Jeff

tpatana wrote in post #9104331
Like I said, no negative impact save the camera buffer.

My camera takes 10 RAWs to buffer at the max fps (~3fps) until it's full. For my use, if I think at least a bit how I take pictures, I never get the buffer full, so it's really minor impact for me. For someone else, it could be bigger issue, especially with those 8-10fps cameras.

On my body (1D Mk II) I get 16-18 RAW+Jpeg frames depending on the ISO used. On a few occasions I wished I had a bigger buffer but it cleared out a frame a sec to the card which allowed me to keep shooting.

Personally, I always have and plan to shoot RAW and in cases I need a Jpeg on-site instantly, I'll shoot RAW+Jpeg Lrg Fine. The benefits of shooting RAW in low light conditions is well worth the small amount of effort of converting the file.

In my case, it was a failed shutter.

tpatana wrote in post #9104015
I haven't used one yet.

Ah, you talking still about photography, yes?

Yes, actually film still photography. An enlarger is a device that holds the negative and is what is used to expose the photo paper.

Here is a picture of one.

http://www.amazon.com …ive-Carrier/dp/B0000A9ZBD

Big K wrote in post #9105701
Yes, actually film still photography. An enlarger is a device that holds the negative and is what is used to expose the photo paper.

Here is a picture of one.

http://www.amazon.com …ive-Carrier/dp/B0000A9ZBD

Yes, I used one of those early 90s at a film photography class. Did lot of fancy stuff with one, as the teacher was one of those fun types who don't limit people's imagination while doing art. I recall flailing hand/objects in the light, covering part of the paper to mix&match several photos to one, placing objects on the paper etc.

But my original (bad) pun was referring to the emails I get lot about enlarging things, and I think those advertisements don't refer to anything photo-related

This is a discussion that, to a point, like the Canon vs Nikon debate, will never have a right or wrong answer.
Personally, I always shoot high res jpeg.
What others do doesn't affect what I do and vice versa.
When I can look at a photo in a magazine and say unequivocally that it was originally shot as a RAW image (or jpeg for that matter) then I'll care.
Until then, I'll continue to shoot hi res jpeg.

As for anyone else - whatever floats your boat.

tfd888 wrote in post #9104595
Error 99 is the general error code the camera uses when it knows something is wrong but doesn't know exactly what is wrong. In a lot of cases, Error 99 is caused by dirty lens/body contacts or battery grips.

Thanks for the tip. I took the battery out, reinserted it, and the camera started working fine. I hope that’s all it was.

MT Stringer wrote in post #9104988
In my case, it was a failed shutter.

That’s my fear though. I have noticed that sometimes (not often) the camera won’t respond when I press the shutter button, and I have to try press it a couple of times.

Maybe it’s time for a visit to CanonCenter, but I digress from the thread topic.

Even if its just fanily snaps on Xmas day I shoot Raw because the control in PP is just so much more accurate

You do that. I'll stick to taking them right the first time.