How many of you shoot .raw .jpeg or both ??

Do you shoot most of the time) .raw .jpeg or always both ?

  • .RAW

    Votes: 72 55.8%

  • .JPEG

    Votes: 14 10.9%

  • BOTH

    Votes: 43 33.3%
  • Total voters
    129
BADGER.BRAD

BADGER.BRAD

Messages
3,723
Edit My Images
Yes
Do you shoot .raw .jpeg or both ? I must admit not liking to spend ages on a PC when I have shot multiple photos, I shoot in .jpeg and try to the best of my skills ( or lack of) to get the camera to produce a .jpeg I like by altering it's internal settings ( normally high saturated) but how about you ?

Sorry I don't seem to be able to edit the ) out of the question ????
 
Last edited:
Raw only for me.
 
RAW only. Takes me 30 seconds to edit a photo in Lightroom and its how I want it, not how the camera thinks I want it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4wd
Raw only. Can edit pretty quickly for 'normal' shots. Sometimes gives some nice extra latitude for landscape editing and night sky stuff especially.
 
I use all three formats- film, jpeg and Raw. It really depends on what I am shooting and why.

For pictures intended to be fine art pictures I will use either film or Raw. For record purposes or trying out ideas, I am likely to shoot jpegs.

I have never shot both Raw and jpeg at the same time. I cannot see the point of that.
 
Last edited:
Raw for me as well. I like to experiment from time to time and raw gives me that option.
I sometimes use the auto function in Capture One for editing "snaps" to see if it's close to what I wanted,
 
RAW only - NX studio helps hide my mistakes. Less options using jpegs.
 
Raw only for me, as I don't have deadlines to deliver pictures and processing has always been a part of producing a picture for me.
 
Don't see any reason to use a RAW format file. JPEG does the job for me, saving time and space (plus wear on the TARDIS). :naughty:
 
RAW and JPG usually - the XT4 produces very nice jpegs, which I often use as a starting point. If I want to process something, I quite often use the JPG first for a quick result. If I have the time, I'll do more with the RAW file.
 
I used to shoot raw, now jpg, but still do the occasional raw if I think something is going to be blown out
 
I shoot both, either RAW+ JPG or in the case of sports, usually large JPG and small JPG. I'll record each onto seperate memory cards.

If I'm working in the field, with finite amounts of time/laptop battery/mobile connectivity, then I'll work with the smaller images to get images online quickly, then revert to the larger file back home where I can spend more time working.

When editing I keep the two folders seperate but I use a lightroom plug-in called synchomatic to copy ratings / colour coding / keywording / editing from one folder to the other.
 
Last edited:
Raw only for me. It's arguably quicker and easier than fiddling with in camera settings and jpegs, WB and applying NR and sharpening for instance and you can always revisit the file and try something else without suffering degradation or changes that can not be easily undone..
 
RAW only for me, even on my cell phone.
 
I shoot RAW + jpg large but I rarely use the jpgs short of reviewing and during the initial cull. I know the camera will do a jpg if I set it to RAW only but I prefer the jpg large for reviewing and if I choose to use one it's at the best quality. My RAW processing takes on agerage jut a couple of minutes per file as I have set myself some presets in LR.
 
RAW for me, for a quick edit I hit "Auto" on Lr then tweak it from there.
 
Raw and jpeg for me. If I shoot raw only then my Fuji won't allow me to zoom in to 100% in camera when reviewing photos, which makes it harder to check you've hit focus when shooting wildlife.
 
Carl Hall said:
Raw and jpeg for me. If I shoot raw only then my Fuji won't allow me to zoom in to 100% in camera when reviewing photos, which makes it harder to check you've hit focus when shooting wildlife.
Click to expand...
That is the problem with raw only, as the raw file only has a small jpeg built in.
There should be a way of getting the raw file to contain a full sized jpeg, to avoid having two files.
 
Kiwi Paul said:
RAW for me, for a quick edit I hit "Auto" on Lr then tweak it from there.
Click to expand...

I shoot RAW mainly now, but I had never considered using the Auto button in LR.
I have just done that on a group of shots to see the effect .
What has surprised me is how the programme has processed the RAW and the outcomes in some instances are not ones that I would normally have arrived at in my way of editing, and in some cases I prefer.

Thank you for this tip
 
Raw+jpg in most instances (jpg only for the rare occasions when I need ultra high sustained "motor drive"), RAW for any image processing, jpg for offsite backup and ease of scanning in directories and quick use in email etc. Only downside I can see is slightly increased data transfer times, not normally an issue shooting and never a problem onto disk.
 
For me with mirror less you see the exposure and i try to get it spot on or very close so I only shoot JPEG fine as they are so much better than they use to be and it makes the work flow so much easier .

Yes Raw may bring out a little more detail but not enough for me to want to mess about with it .

Rob.

ps i only use M mode.
 
GyRob said:
For me with mirror less you see the exposure and i try to get it spot on or very close so I only shoot JPEG fine as they are so much better than they use to be and it makes the work flow so much easier .

Yes Raw may bring out a little more detail but not enough for me to want to mess about with it .

Rob.

ps i only use M mode.
Click to expand...

One thing I've found is that pictures I took years ago and processed using the free Canon software or some other years old processing package look much better when processed with newer software. I think this is one good advantage of shooting raw... you can revisit the pictures and reprocess them as processing software improves.
 
JPG only.. I am never going to edit my pictures that much.. Its quite amazing what Photoshop can do wiht jpgs :)
 
superpippo said:
I shoot RAW mainly now, but I had never considered using the Auto button in LR.
I have just done that on a group of shots to see the effect .
What has surprised me is how the programme has processed the RAW and the outcomes in some instances are not ones that I would normally have arrived at in my way of editing, and in some cases I prefer.

Thank you for this tip
Click to expand...
Yes, the "Auto" sometimes produces really good results that only require minor tweaks, other times quite a lot of tweaking but I always try it first just to see where it takes me.
 
woof woof said:
One thing I've found is that pictures I took years ago and processed using the free Canon software or some other years old processing package look much better when processed with newer software. I think this is one good advantage of shooting raw... you can revisit the pictures and reprocess them as processing software improves.
Click to expand...
Yes but I can do that too by copying the jpeg to edit and keep the original :)
 
GyRob said:
Yes but I can do that too by copying the jpeg to edit and keep the original :)
Click to expand...

But with the jpeg it's all baked in when you take the picture and changing things like WB are nowhere near as easy if possible at all plus you have to apply changes in an order whereas with raw you can apply the changes all at once.

I do really struggle to understand why anyone would shoot jpeg unless for the simplest things as raw processing can take just seconds or can be done with batch applied presets. TBH I only shoot jpeg when checking the sensor for contamination. I suppose another use for jpegs is machine gunners who don't have time to process pictures at all before they're zapped off somewhere.
 
About 95% Jpeg but have one camera that I shoot RAW with.
 
woof woof said:
I do really struggle to understand why anyone would shoot jpeg unless for the simplest things as raw processing can take just seconds or can be done with batch applied presets. TBH I only shoot jpeg when checking the sensor for contamination. I suppose another use for jpegs is machine gunners who don't have time to process pictures at all before they're zapped off somewhere.
Click to expand...

Because I have set my camers up the way I like them and shooting RAW adds nothing to them.
I just like the JPEGS than now come out of the cameras I use and dont see why everyone says "you must shoot RAW", I have used RAW for many years but now, for me, shooting RAW adds very little.
The only reason I shoot RAW in one camera is because it is very old digital and I cant get the JPEGS how I like.

Were all differnet, thats what makes the world such a wonderful place :)
 
Last edited:
Knikki said:
Because I have set my cameras up the way I like them and shooting RAW adds nothing to them.
I just like the JPEGS than now come out of the cmaeras I use and dont see why everyone says "you must shoot RAW", I have used RAW for many years but now, foe me, shooting RAW adds very little.
The only reason I shoot RAW in one camera is because it is very old didgital and I cant get the JPEGS how I like.

Were all differnt, thats what makes the world such a wonderful place :)
Click to expand...

Of course you don't have to shoot raw but when you shoot jpeg and something needs fettling such as difficult WB it is IMO much easier to process a raw. Just my VHO. Another VHO is that your computer and your processing software are probably more powerful and better suited to getting the best end result that the cameras in camera firmware. Plus of course at some point the firmware updates from your camera will stop but if you shoot raw you can reprocess your shots which better software as it becomes available.

But to each their own :D
 
I shoot both - set up SD card 1 for RAW and SD Card 2 for JPG :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top