Convince me to shoot in RAW

Status
Not open for further replies.
infared said:
OK...I will agree:

Jpegs for junk photography.
Raw for keepers.
Still slices the same way that I stated above, no?

I'll bet all those journalistic, news togs and paps just love you.

To my knowledge they all/ mostly shoot in jpg because it's quicker and a more compact file size to send over to editors for the time conscious story. Such time sensitive material can not sit around waiting for the tog to get home and do a bit of processing - on top of which there is much issue with making sure images presented have not been manipulated and processed.

In truth, RAW and jpg both have their places in photography, and it's not about experience or kit being used.
It's about preference of the tog, convenience for image management and suitably for the type of shot being captured.

I always shoot RAW now - but the X-Pro 1 captures images in RAW and one of its many flavours of film emulated jpg modes, which of course is what that camera is so liked for!
 
Upvote 0
For me:

RAW for everything except high speed action. The reason is two-fold:

1. When you are machine gunning you really will fill your cards / computer quickly wit RAW.
2. Buffer size greatly increases with jpeg

To accomplish this, I actually have my "fast action" custom mode set to jpeg...

Other than that... There are no other valid reasons to shoot jpeg (for me).
 
Upvote 0
I suppose the guy at Sports Illustrated shooting JPG because the photos need to go to website live is shooting junk. You shoot in RAW for one set of circumstances and shoot in JPG for another and neither has to do with quality/junk photography. That is a gross misinterpretation of their uses. I've had to shoot JPG at sports before and of course I've shot RAW at sports before. To say one is better than the other in all situations is assanine.

Personally I shoot RAW because I like to have it. Yes I've shot sports before and racked up 500 RAW files. I simply picked the best 50-70 and deleted the rest. It wasn't that hard. And no I don't use RAW as a crutch, I use it because I can and it's available to me. It's called technology.
 
Upvote 0
bdunbar79 said:
I suppose the guy at Sports Illustrated shooting JPG because the photos need to go to website live is shooting junk. You shoot in RAW for one set of circumstances and shoot in JPG for another and neither has to do with quality/junk photography. That is a gross misinterpretation of their uses. I've had to shoot JPG at sports before and of course I've shot RAW at sports before. To say one is better than the other in all situations is assanine.

Personally I shoot RAW because I like to have it. Yes I've shot sports before and racked up 500 RAW files. I simply picked the best 50-70 and deleted the rest. It wasn't that hard. And no I don't use RAW as a crutch, I use it because I can and it's available to me. It's called technology.

To My knowledge, Sport illustrated Photogs shoot RAW because they will crop the crap out of the pictures later.
 
Upvote 0
ScottyP said:
Shoot in RAW.

If you don't, no one will ever love you, and your doggy will die.

Convinced?

I have a dog. I don't want him to die.
Thanks for convincing me!

To anyone else here to answer my question and not add wood to the fire, It didn't take me long to see the benefits of RAW. For some reason I thought shooting in RAW would add an extra step to my workflow. Using Lightroom, it doesn't, save for slightly longer processing times, which is more than worth it for the results I'm seeing.
 
Upvote 0
RobT said:
ScottyP said:
Shoot in RAW.

If you don't, no one will ever love you, and your doggy will die.

Convinced?

I have a dog. I don't want him to die.
Thanks for convincing me!

To anyone else here to answer my question and not add wood to the fire, It didn't take me long to see the benefits of RAW. For some reason I thought shooting in RAW would add an extra step to my workflow. Using Lightroom, it doesn't, save for slightly longer processing times, which is more than worth it for the results I'm seeing.
Great! Enjoy the flexibility. And (my English teacher would be dismayed that I started the sentence with this word) if you need JPGs in a hurry, shoot both. Whenever I shoot both, I write both to the CF card.
 
Upvote 0
V8Beast said:
K-amps said:
RobT said:
Convince me to shoot in RAW

So that you can wear Jared Polin's "I shoot RAW" T-Shirts.

Dumb question: Are these shirts intended for people that proudly exclaim the format in which they shoot, or is it meant to mock RAW shooters who think they're better photographers just because they shoot RAW?

I must admit having similar thoughts. Perhaps those t-shirts can be used for both, can't they?

It just depends on who is in the t-shirt. ;)
 
Upvote 0
V8Beast said:
K-amps said:
RobT said:
Convince me to shoot in RAW

So that you can wear Jared Polin's "I shoot RAW" T-Shirts.

Dumb question: Are these shirts intended for people that proudly exclaim the format in which they shoot, or is it meant to mock RAW shooters who think they're better photographers just because they shoot RAW?

Imagine those who have a D800 and shoot RAW? Now that is hardcore.
 
Upvote 0
bdunbar79 said:
V8Beast said:
K-amps said:
RobT said:
Convince me to shoot in RAW

So that you can wear Jared Polin's "I shoot RAW" T-Shirts.

Dumb question: Are these shirts intended for people that proudly exclaim the format in which they shoot, or is it meant to mock RAW shooters who think they're better photographers just because they shoot RAW?

Imagine those who have a D800 and shoot RAW? Now that is hardcore.

Having a D800 and shooting RAW? I can only imagine how many woman that would get you ;D
 
Upvote 0
V8Beast said:
K-amps said:
RobT said:
Convince me to shoot in RAW

So that you can wear Jared Polin's "I shoot RAW" T-Shirts.

Dumb question: Are these shirts intended for people that proudly exclaim the format in which they shoot, or is it meant to mock RAW shooters who think they're better photographers just because they shoot RAW?

Not a dumb question. Very dumb t-shirt.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.