Do you usually shoot RAW+JPEG(large) or RAW+JPEG(small)?


Status
Not open for further replies.

CY_OH

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2004
1,236
1
38
34
Ang Mo Kio
www.flickr.com
#2
For me, RAW+JPEG(large) is when JPEGs need to be submitted on the spot, RAW for processing of selected photos at own time.

RAW+JPEG(small) for convenience of previewing in Windows My Computer without opening additional software.
 

windwaver

Senior Member
May 19, 2007
1,276
0
36
Europa
windwaver.tripod.com
#3
In any case, shooting in RAW+JPEG(large) or RAW+JPEG(small), the 'quality' of the RAW image is still the same right (i.e. resolution, etc)? In that case, why do people even bother to save a large version of the jpg? Might as well shoot RAW+JPEG(small).
 

splim

New Member
May 6, 2006
404
0
0
sgsplim.multiply.com
#4
In any case, shooting in RAW+JPEG(large) or RAW+JPEG(small), the 'quality' of the RAW image is still the same right (i.e. resolution, etc)? In that case, why do people even bother to save a large version of the jpg? Might as well shoot RAW+JPEG(small).
To fill up my CF card faster, so that I don't shoot too much rubbish.
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#5
In any case, shooting in RAW+JPEG(large) or RAW+JPEG(small), the 'quality' of the RAW image is still the same right (i.e. resolution, etc)? In that case, why do people even bother to save a large version of the jpg? Might as well shoot RAW+JPEG(small).
Tat is for ppl who may want to cut down on the editing work. If the Jpeg shot can make it, then no need to edit the Raw one anymore.

This is useful for those who have to go thru a lot of snaps and need to save as much time as possible.

I personally want quality and will take my time to edit, so I prefer to shoot RAW only, no point for a jpeg which I won't bother to look at or use.
 

windwaver

Senior Member
May 19, 2007
1,276
0
36
Europa
windwaver.tripod.com
#6
Tat is for ppl who may want to cut down on the editing work. If the Jpeg shot can make it, then no need to edit the Raw one anymore.

This is useful for those who have to go thru a lot of snaps and need to save as much time as possible.

I personally want quality and will take my time to edit, so I prefer to shoot RAW only, no point for a jpeg which I won't bother to look at or use.
Hmmm....that's what I meant. I also process from RAW all the time but I was wondering if shooting RAW+JPEG(small) affects the output in any way (not that I know of) :)
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#7
Hmmm....that's what I meant. I also process from RAW all the time but I was wondering if shooting RAW+JPEG(small) affects the output in any way (not that I know of) :)
Nope.. you are just allowing the camera to process the shot for you (in camera)
 

giantcanopy

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2007
6,232
2
0
SG
#9
RAW+LARGE cause there are times i just get the picture off the jpeg.

Ryan
 

tSkye

New Member
Nov 8, 2005
989
0
0
Farrer Park
#10
Actually, just shoot in RAW+JPG(small,normal) rather than (small,fine).

Essentially, the jpegs will be used for extremely fast viewing. You may wish to put them in separate folders, ie. RAW and JPG. Just pick out those images with the best expressions, right moments and composition, then remember the numbers and move to the RAW for editing.
 

windwaver

Senior Member
May 19, 2007
1,276
0
36
Europa
windwaver.tripod.com
#11
Actually, just shoot in RAW+JPG(small,normal) rather than (small,fine).

Essentially, the jpegs will be used for extremely fast viewing. You may wish to put them in separate folders, ie. RAW and JPG. Just pick out those images with the best expressions, right moments and composition, then remember the numbers and move to the RAW for editing.
I see, I have been shooting in RAW+Large but I find that it's very time consuming at times when I need to shoot fast :). I process the RAW files anyway.
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#12
I see, I have been shooting in RAW+Large but I find that it's very time consuming at times when I need to shoot fast :). I process the RAW files anyway.
Then just shoot RAW.... forget the jpeg
 

Jul 2, 2004
489
1
18
Singapore
#13
My preference is to shoot in RAW + smallest JPG. The JPG is there just to make it easier for me to sort and quickly preview images in Explorer. The images that I like from the JPG previews are those that I'll work on intently in RAW. :)
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#14
My preference is to shoot in RAW + smallest JPG. The JPG is there just to make it easier for me to sort and quickly preview images in Explorer. The images that I like from the JPG previews are those that I'll work on intently in RAW. :)
You can browse using Adobe Bridge... save the space. and time
 

Jul 2, 2004
489
1
18
Singapore
#15
Yep I know. There's also a RAW thumbnail viewer for Windows, but I've found neither Bridge browsing or that viewer (which causes Gallery to load its images real slow) as easy or fast as viewing the small JPGs. :)
 

tSkye

New Member
Nov 8, 2005
989
0
0
Farrer Park
#16
Even Bridge's loading of RAW files can be terribly slow when loading a large amount of files in one folder. Thankfully for cache, it just happens the first time you view it.
 

GavinTing

New Member
Oct 16, 2007
1,298
0
0
26
#17
Using a mac, I can see RAW files without any additional software. I used to use RAW+JPEG, but then I realise I have to rename two files when archiving o.o When there are already 200 shots to rename.. X2 makes it even more tiring
 

calebk

Senior Member
Jul 25, 2006
10,594
0
0
Clementi
#18
Using a mac, I can see RAW files without any additional software. I used to use RAW+JPEG, but then I realise I have to rename two files when archiving o.o When there are already 200 shots to rename.. X2 makes it even more tiring
Use Automator to rename. Does it in a matter of 3s for about 150 files.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom