I wonder what other are shooting. I shot almost only JPEGs, mostly I'm happy with the quality, even though I encountered problems with some scenes, where I got some nasty effects, especially in large areas with small color graduation (night sky...). I tried RAW for some of these shoots, but somehow it didn't help that much; probably it has to do with the fact, that my skills at RAW processing are rather limited.
RAW or JPEG
- Thread starter aj1575
- Start date
- Status
I started out using only JPEG. I eventually switched over to RAW and never went back. Never even considered it. It really blew me away at first how much more you could do with a RAW file. You should really try it, Camera Raw (plugin of photoshop) is really not that complicated. A good, high quality monitor makes things a lot easier.
Upvote
0
I shoot raw plus jpeg. 99% of the jpegs go into the trash. It's taken me over a year to get decent at post. 27" iMac is in the near future.
Upvote
0
I only switch to JPEG when I want long bursts of continuous shots, following some active subject, hoping for the perfect shot to pop out the string. Shooting raw overwhelms the buffer too quickly.
Oh, I also use JPEG when checking the autofocus on a lens, so that I can zoom in something finer than the thumbnail JPEG in raw images on the back screen.
Other than that, it is raw all the way.
Oh, I also use JPEG when checking the autofocus on a lens, so that I can zoom in something finer than the thumbnail JPEG in raw images on the back screen.
Other than that, it is raw all the way.
Upvote
0
JonAustin
Telecom / IT consultant and semi-pro photographer
SDFilmFan said:
Good points. I almost never shoot long enough bursts to need to switch to JPEG.
It still amazes me, though, that cameras can process the sensor data and write it to a JPEG file faster than it can simply write out the RAW file, even with current processor technology and card write speeds.
Upvote
0
- Status
