Alright guys & gals,
What do you prefer? RAW? JPEG?
What do you prefer? RAW? JPEG?
RAW or JPEG
- Thread starter PhotoDawg
- Start date
I prefer jpegs because I like pictures well done and not RAW!
I think RAW makes you lazy. Yeah you are able to adjust everything in post processing, but with jpeg you force your head to think of your settings and what works best. I don't know any press shooters who shoot RAW.
I think RAW makes you lazy. Yeah you are able to adjust everything in post processing, but with jpeg you force your head to think of your settings and what works best. I don't know any press shooters who shoot RAW.
Jonathan F. said:
That's so funny I forgot to laugh!!!! :roll:
Raw. I took 1400 images in Tuscany two years ago and could kick myself because I have a better mastery of processing but with jpegs I have so little range to work with!
Rich
RAW RAW
always now I have switched. Voted too. Must be getting better.
Bob F.
always now I have switched. Voted too. Must be getting better.
Bob F.
PhotoDawg said:
I already spend an average of 15 minute per picture on post processing.
If I shot RAW, I wouldn't have any time to shoot.
I'm happy with the results I'm getting with fine jpgs and Photoshop. If that changes, I'll give RAW a try.
Raw and I could not live without it. Whenever I shoot with my old camera (cp950) I get frustrated with the lack of control over the image.
Frank: I find ACR pretty fast with RAW especially when I batch process, which you can do without writing an action (just do one then use the menu to tell ACR to open the rest of the shots from the session with the same settings.).
Frank: I find ACR pretty fast with RAW especially when I batch process, which you can do without writing an action (just do one then use the menu to tell ACR to open the rest of the shots from the session with the same settings.).
Only time I shoot JPEG now days is when I'm in danger of running out of storage. RAW is the way to go - for me at least.
Neil
Neil
RAW because I *am* lazy
It may "make you lazy", which I do Not agree with, btw, but thanks to Ed Mac, pushing me to give it a try, I made the switch a little over a yr ago when I got my D2H. I has saved me from untold user errors, esp the time when I had my WB set to Incandescent, instead of Sunny. Those little camera icons DO look almost the same you know! Shot a card full of images, only to get them into the puter and find they were all BLUE! Guess I should'a chimped, huh?
It may "make you lazy", which I do Not agree with, btw, but thanks to Ed Mac, pushing me to give it a try, I made the switch a little over a yr ago when I got my D2H. I has saved me from untold user errors, esp the time when I had my WB set to Incandescent, instead of Sunny. Those little camera icons DO look almost the same you know! Shot a card full of images, only to get them into the puter and find they were all BLUE! Guess I should'a chimped, huh?
RAW+JPEG. Lazy has nothing to do w/ RAW. If you're too lazy to do anything in-camera, you will just give yourself tons of work to do in PP-ing the RAW files. That's just not very smart, if you ask me. As usual, the best approach to solving problems (of all sorts) requires a certain judicious balance between the various tools, skills, time, margin for errors, etc. available at one's disposable. And of course, it may well also depend on individual style and such. Afterall, it's not mere laziness that makes us want to travel by car and other faster forms of transportation instead of by bicycle or just our own 2 feet.
OTOH, I keep the JPEG (in RAW+JPEG) precisely because I can be quite lazy about PP work.
The "truth" is that most people probably stick w/ JPEG (after learning about RAW) because they don't want to postprocess. If anyone's lazy, it's probably the JPEG-ers. Heh heh...
BTW, why doesn't the poll have RAW+JPEG as a choice? I voted RAW because that's what I'd probably do if I can't do both.
_Man_
OTOH, I keep the JPEG (in RAW+JPEG) precisely because I can be quite lazy about PP work.
The "truth" is that most people probably stick w/ JPEG (after learning about RAW) because they don't want to postprocess. If anyone's lazy, it's probably the JPEG-ers. Heh heh...
BTW, why doesn't the poll have RAW+JPEG as a choice? I voted RAW because that's what I'd probably do if I can't do both.
_Man_
RAW + JPG
Raw + Small basic JPG (3MP), that way I can check very quikcly which ones i want then dump the rest and BTW small, basic JPG looks great on 4X6 prints! Perfect for tracvel snapshots!
Man-Fai Wong said:RAW+JPEG. Lazy has nothing to do w/ RAW. If you're too lazy to do anything in-camera, you will just give yourself tons of work to do in PP-ing the RAW files. That's just not very smart, if you ask me. As usual, the best approach to solving problems (of all sorts) requires a certain judicious balance between the various tools, skills, time, margin for errors, etc. available at one's disposable. And of course, it may well also depend on individual style and such. Afterall, it's not mere laziness that makes us want to travel by car and other faster forms of transportation instead of by bicycle or just our own 2 feet.
OTOH, I keep the JPEG (in RAW+JPEG) precisely because I can be quite lazy about PP work.
The "truth" is that most people probably stick w/ JPEG (after learning about RAW) because they don't want to postprocess. If anyone's lazy, it's probably the JPEG-ers. Heh heh...
I'm not saying RAW is bad, but I've seen shooting situations where I don't think it's neccessary. For example if your shooting birds against the sky as a background, with minimal shifts in color and contrast, one can save time in post processing and just shoot jpeg. I can understand if you want to shoot RAW where there is big shifts in color, contrast and tonality, but in many situations you can save yourself time and storage space and just shoot in JPEG. And since we are shooting digital, all you need to do is take a couple snap shots, adjust your settings accordingly, then you are set!
Well to each their own, I'm just saying that JPEG is still a viable option for serious photography, and not just an option used by the unwashed masses!
8) 
I like RAW!
I like raw. The post-processing only takes a couple of minutes in general, more if I want to be real picky but then I'd spend probably just as much time with JPEGs and most of it is after the raw conversion per se, for instance after the initial ACR screen...
As a matter of fact, other than once or twice when I ran out of storage and shot JPEGs to keep going with a (slow, 12X) 256MB card from the Coolpix days, I only shoot raw. I use Nikon View as my image browser and decide which ones to have a closer look at in Capture, PS or now RawMagick. This does not mean that I don't adjust in-camera (D70) settings, but I usually leave the tone curve to medium-low and sharpening to medium-low as well, which is a good general compromise for both, I found. I try to get WB right because although you can, in general, fix it in raw (and in JPEG too, most of the time), there are cases where the result is not as good. At least, I try to get close...
If I was using a portable storage tank like the Coolwalker, EPSON P-2000 or even the iPod Photo (not recommended to critically look at photos, but heck, it has storage and you can view what amounts to thumbnails! My wife has one), I would shoot RAW+JPEG so that the JPEG version would show on screen: most of those devices don't support NEF files... yet! :wink:
I like raw. The post-processing only takes a couple of minutes in general, more if I want to be real picky but then I'd spend probably just as much time with JPEGs and most of it is after the raw conversion per se, for instance after the initial ACR screen...
As a matter of fact, other than once or twice when I ran out of storage and shot JPEGs to keep going with a (slow, 12X) 256MB card from the Coolpix days, I only shoot raw. I use Nikon View as my image browser and decide which ones to have a closer look at in Capture, PS or now RawMagick. This does not mean that I don't adjust in-camera (D70) settings, but I usually leave the tone curve to medium-low and sharpening to medium-low as well, which is a good general compromise for both, I found. I try to get WB right because although you can, in general, fix it in raw (and in JPEG too, most of the time), there are cases where the result is not as good. At least, I try to get close...
If I was using a portable storage tank like the Coolwalker, EPSON P-2000 or even the iPod Photo (not recommended to critically look at photos, but heck, it has storage and you can view what amounts to thumbnails! My wife has one), I would shoot RAW+JPEG so that the JPEG version would show on screen: most of those devices don't support NEF files... yet! :wink:
RAW
Hi Steven,
Thank you very much for those nice words. I am glad that I helped you.
I have been shooting RAW ever since I got my D100. I do a lot of work with fire scene photography, and I would have missed many shots it it weren't for RAW
Steve S said:It may "make you lazy", which I do Not agree with, btw, but thanks to Ed Mac, pushing me to give it a try, I made the switch a little over a yr ago when I got my D2H. I has saved me from untold user errors, esp the time when I had my WB set to Incandescent, instead of Sunny. They DO look almost the same you know! Shot a card full of images, only to get them into the puter and find they were all BLUE! Guess I should'a chimped, huh?
Hi Steven,
Thank you very much for those nice words. I am glad that I helped you.
I have been shooting RAW ever since I got my D100. I do a lot of work with fire scene photography, and I would have missed many shots it it weren't for RAW
Don't mention it, Ed, I gave you credit...
In U.F's 28-70 Lens thread too! :lol:
In U.F's 28-70 Lens thread too! :lol:
C
Carol Steele
Guest
The main reason why I shoot RAW is that I have the original captured data if I ever need go back to it. They are my insurance against my own stupidy
If I have nailed my shots 100% of the time (and few of us can truly claim that we do that), it would be really simply to just batch out a heap of jpegs from the RAW files whilst you go take the dog for a walk (or something similar). I invariably find that I can improve the shot by a quick set of adjustments in Capture - I guess I might spend 10-15 secs optimising the shots I want to keep in Capture.
But, hey, that's just my thing - each to their own
If I have nailed my shots 100% of the time (and few of us can truly claim that we do that), it would be really simply to just batch out a heap of jpegs from the RAW files whilst you go take the dog for a walk (or something similar). I invariably find that I can improve the shot by a quick set of adjustments in Capture - I guess I might spend 10-15 secs optimising the shots I want to keep in Capture.
But, hey, that's just my thing - each to their own
Always RAW...I don't really see that it adds any significant processing time, unless you want it to. I shot my first few jpgs when I got the camera, and then switched... I could never go back! My husband recently got a D70 and he's shooting JPG; I was teaching him a little about post-processing and it was driving me crazy to have all those greyed-out functions in Capture, lol....I hated not having the options!
BTW, some of us don't have the possibility of shooting RAW +JPG ...but I'm not sure I'd bother with that even if I could.
BTW, some of us don't have the possibility of shooting RAW +JPG ...but I'm not sure I'd bother with that even if I could.
Similar threads
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
