I've been shooting all my imags as Large/Fine JPEG...

should I be shooting in RAW? I'm not doing professional work (yet) so I don't

do a lot of editing/manipulating of images.

If you're currently not "into" editing/manipulating images and are happy with the images that you get from your camera, you should continue to shoot Large/Fine JPGs. <b>However</b>, if you would like to take out "insurance" on future post-processing opportunities, I would highly recommend shooting in RAW (+JPG).

Being a professional has nothing to do with shooting RAW but I can see how one might think of it as a lot of work to edit RAW files. I used to do all JPEGS but now all RAW. I have no plans of being a professional. Also, you control how much editing is done from very little to major overhaul. One thing I like about RAW is that as I get better at editing I go back to the original RAW files and make adjustments.

If you are photographing snapshots of family gatherings, typical tourist travel photos, kids sports, and the like, jpegs are probably ok. If you have any intentions of anything resembling "fine art," eg landscapes, still life, macro, portraiture, it seems absurd to shoot anything but RAW. As the other poster said, it is future insurance for better correction later. It is probably overstatement, but shooting jpegs with a new modern DSLR seems to me to be a waste, If you're going to shoot all jpegs, get a decent point and shoot, save some money and hassle.

 

Mostly, have fun.

 

Eric

I used to shoot RAW, now I shoot all jpg. Raw files are relatively large and unwieldy, and they add an extra conversion step to processing. I didn't find that shooting RAW really added much flexibility in the end for me, so I just gave it up. I may try it again in the future if I find something 'important' to shoot, but for now...

back with my 10D I shot RAW very rarely, Large Fine JPG was good enough for my purposes reserving RAW for those shots I was trying to make as good as possible or which I had a good idea would need post-production.

 

With my 5D since it supports RAW + JPG I save RAW + small fine JPG the RAW for post-processing and printing and the jpg for small easy to handle files to emails, web, CDs for friends etc... sort of digital proofs.

With the raw file you retain all of the information the camera received. With a jpeg you've told the camera to make a compressed version of that information with slight degradation of fine detail, to commit to a certain color balance and to discard that original information, leaving you with a file that is difficult to post process without further degradation. Production of jpegs from raw can be virtually an automated process. Hard drive and optical disc capacities continue to increase rapidly. Your call.

The problem with RAW is file size, as others have mentioned. If you have sufficient computer power it doesn't really matter. However, with my ancient computer (salvaged from a builder's skip) it takes 30 minutes to convert 20 images - and that is without any alterations. So I use both methods as required.

John is right, being a professional has nothing to do with shooting raw.

 

I'm a full time pro, have been for 30+ years and fully digital shooting with our own lab for 6 years. Almost everything is shot jpg at the max. compression setting (least lost). We shoot manual WB, manual exposure. There is very little need to adjust anything. Most photographers seem to prefer auto for everything, which may create problem images at times. Have we ever screwed-up an exposure that would have been saved by shooting raw? NOPE. Do we lose anything in the image that our customers care about? NOPE. Do I go around telling people that part of their image (or spirit) was lost when I saved the file? NOPE

 

Facts are this: DSLR raw records a small portion of the detail in a scene, jpg records even less. Does it show? Not in our work.

 

HOWEVER, we are people photographers. I rarely sharpen and certainly do not want every pore on the face to show in final prints. In many cases, we are removing detail that customers don't want to see. If I was a commercial photographer or selling high priced, large size landscapes, I would shoot raw. But then, I'd probably have a digital back for a medium format camera, or even shoot large format film and scan.

 

When in doubt, shoot raw. Each to their own. I'm sure this argument will go on forever. I just like to make sure that both sides are represented. There is no 'correct' method for everyone.

 

Doug

Should? There's no "should" involved.

 

If you get your white balance and exposure correct when you shoot there's very little need to shoot RAW. The final image will not be significantly better.

 

If you get the white balance and exposure wrong, or if you need to do other large corrections, shooting RAW will enable you to recover the image better than if you shoot JPG.

 

This might provide some more information http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/raw.html

Well, the size of RAW file and the need to convert should not stop anyone from shooting RAW. Of course, it may become a major chore when you shoot hundreds of images every week (or, God forbid, every day :)

 

Personally - I prefer to shoot RAW due to much wider range of corrections that can be applied later to a RAW file. I prefer to shoot fewer pics and spend time on selected ones. It would be impossible with large number of images - but I do not really understand the need to shoot hundreds of images - there are not enough good subjects in a day IMHO. YMMV, as usual. Nothing wrong with shooting JPEGs either - I just prefer RAW. Just my $0.02.

I have a slightly different perspective. I shoot RAW 99% of the time. Besides the discussion above on flexibility etc (which i find is true), my prime reason for shooting RAW is that i do not want to be bothered at the time of shooting to decide about white balance, style, sharpening, saturation etc. I found i messed up several shots in my early days in Digital Photography by forgetting to reset a color balance or white balance or style after a certain shoot. Now I would rather shoot RAW and Manual (occasionally Apperture Priority or Shutter Priority) and make those decisions in post processing. At the time of shooting i only concern myself with exposure, DOF, and composition.

 

As for the concern about the size of files, i also don't think it's a major factor anymore. The cost/GB of cards is going down by the day and I find if I carry 2 or 3 2GB cards i have enough storage for several days of shooting when i go on a short trip. For longer trips, I bring my laptop along and download periodically.

Thanks, Bob Atkins, for your link <p><P>

 

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/raw.html <p><P>

 

to your web site which explains all the RAW, JPEG, J2K, and TIFF gobbledigook. It is definitely a must read (if you don't know this stuff yet, of course).