RAW or Jpeg?

[cavemonkey]

I always shoot my photos in RAW format

But on recent trip oversea with my friend (who also owns a dslr), he told me its pointless to shoot it in RAW unless you are only going play arnd with the white balance. If not Jpeg would do just as well.

So is what he said really true? I mean I shoot in RAW format so that I can edit them in Lightroom as well as in Adobe Photoshop. but can this also be done with jpeg?

Bottomline is that what is the difference between RAW and jpeg and what makes most ppl shoot in RAW format?

 

[fotoudavid]

I only shoot raw when it is important, else jpeg is fine. The different is jpeg it is compressed, but not that bad, u can still print quite big in size. Raw is nothing was done, as original as possibles. I hope i am right, cos i dun read manuels etc.

 

[zzyzx]

rubbish! it's like you buy a turbo-charged vehicle but disabled the turbo. what's the point? with memory card price so cheap nowadays.. and when you need the extra flexibility in PP the photo which you feel needs a great deal of work, and to find you're only restricted to work in JPEG. you NEVER KNOW when you'll need that RAW. A lightning doesn strike the same spot twice btw... ask you friend to throw away his dslr and buy a cheap pns camera since it serve the same purpose.

 

[Rashkae]

Bottomline is that what is the difference between RAW and jpeg and what makes most ppl shoot in RAW format?

Google is your friend.

Other than WB, there's a HUGE amount of dynamic range and extra detail in a RAW file.

 

[GavinTing]

RAW makes it "easier" to "get back" "lost detail" (notice alot of "").

JPEG has very little room for tweaks.

 

[HTCahHTC]

just started shooting RAW 3 days ago. yes, it's not only about WB. i tired the difference, it's obvious to me. RAW has more details preserved.
like wat zzyzx have said, 'A lightning doesn strike the same spot twice'

yes, downside is RAW takes a good lot of time to load into desktop (a.w.a editing).
but, wat's lost cannot be retrieved right?

 

[Octarine]

So is what he said really true? I mean I shoot in RAW format so that I can edit them in Lightroom as well as in Adobe Photoshop. but can this also be done with jpeg?

Take pictures in RAW and in JPEG, load them into LR and see what you still can change (right hand side menus). Obvious, isn't it?

 

[zac08]

Exposure control, white balance, sharpening, etc... it's all at your controls instead of the camera.

It's either shoot JPEG (which is controlled by the camera and heavily reduced in quality)

or

shoot in RAW and retain all these controls on your side (to work with in the computer)

 

[eosdigital]

I noticed that the RAW version of the image compared to JPEG has somewhat better ISO noise control. Is this true? RAW ISO 3200 seems little cleaner than JPEG ISO 3200..or is it NR by LR because i did not set any NR in LR.

 

[catchlights]

RAW or Jpeg, it depends on your final output..

if you want to take photos of some items to put in ebay or clubsnap for selling, do you think worth the effort of shooting RAW?

and if you shooting a class reunion group photo, would you want to risk yourself of shooting Jpeg?

 

[catchlights]

btw, you are not able to correct WB in jpg, but if you able to do curve adjustment, you still able to correct the color to certain extend.

 

[catchlights]

rubbish! it's like you buy a turbo-charged vehicle but disabled the turbo. what's the point? with memory card price so cheap nowadays.. and when you need the extra flexibility in PP the photo which you feel needs a great deal of work, and to find you're only restricted to work in JPEG. you NEVER KNOW when you'll need that RAW. A lightning doesn strike the same spot twice btw... ask you friend to throw away his dslr and buy a cheap pns camera since it serve the same purpose.

if you have a turbo-charged vehicle, does it mean you to have ramp till it reach the top speed of your car between all the traffic junctions, even it is 50 metre away?

 

[osocan]

For holidays, I'll shoot mainly in jpegs and occasionally RAW if I think that the shots would be manipulated later on. Dont want to spend the next 6 months still processing the pictures. The better half would be nagging me to death :sweatsm: Perhaps I should seriously consider RAW+jpeg

Just sharing my experience.

 

[glenncain]

depends on your audience of the photo. if i am shooting group shots for my company, these people cant tell one pixel from the other. small fine could even do for that. but if i went on a photography run, i'd want my details.

 

[Override2Zion]

For casual shots, JPEG should be good enough bah. If you want to have overall control with minimal loss of details to start with, RAW would be for you. Bear in mind that JPEG employs a lossy form of compression, finer details are lost during the compression. When you shoot in RAW, data from the sensors only goes through bayern interpolation. Some if not all of the image enhancement/manipulation algorithms employed in the camera's firmware are bypassed after that to keep the RAW images as original as possible for offline manipulation. JPEG or RAW? You decide

 

[flipfreak]

family snaps can take jpeg la. things that u took time to snap shld be recorded in raw as a safety precaution.

 

[Dithiolium]

I only shoot raw when it is important, else jpeg is fine. The different is jpeg it is compressed, but not that bad, u can still print quite big in size. Raw is nothing was done, as original as possibles. I hope i am right, cos i dun read manuels etc.

Same here, I used to be a RAW only person. The post processing takes extra work and increases turn around time.
Now I mostly shoot JPEG. With the occasional RAW+JPEG when I know the shooting conditions are difficult and no time to adjust on the spot. Different formats for different end clients.
When I'm on holiday I shoot RAW.

 

[zzyzx]

if you have a turbo-charged vehicle, does it mean you to have ramp till it reach the top speed of your car between all the traffic junctions, even it is 50 metre away?

ehh.. i mean disable the turbo charger, not avoid using. anyway we're not going to argue abt turbo chargers right? :lovegrin:

 

[eosdigital]

ehh.. i mean disable the turbo charger, not avoid using. anyway we're not going to argue abt turbo chargers right? :lovegrin:

activating the turbo gonna cost u fuel consumption..aka processing time ;p

 

[giantcanopy]

见仁见智

For me R O A R ! ! ( raw )

Ryan