JPeg V's Raw

[daltoned]

I know this question has probably been discussed before, so forgive me if so. Have read in Tom Ang's Book "How to Photograph Absolutely Everything ". In the section dealing with camera settings and quality settings, he says " use highest quality setting, but avoid raw or tiff unless you have a specific need for these formats". I can accept the highest quality Jpeg but had come to the conclusion that shooting in raw gave better opportunities for later corrections etc., also gives a higher resolution for printing purposes.
Would welcome any views from forum members on this question.

Thanks

[coffee]

I know this question has probably been discussed before, so forgive me if so. Have read in Tom Ang's Book "How to Photograph Absolutely Everything ". In the section dealing with camera settings and quality settings, he says " use highest quality setting, but avoid raw or tiff unless you have a specific need for these formats". I can accept the highest quality Jpeg but had come to the conclusion that shooting in raw gave better opportunities for later corrections etc., also gives a higher resolution for printing purposes.
Would welcome any views from forum members on this question.

Thanks

You are right on the money. I wouldn't even consider not shooting in RAW. White balance correction alone is worth shooting RAW.

[jerryph]

RAW is *all* I shoot. It offers better quality, better ability to recover from over or under exposed pictures (higher dynamic range), it suffers NO generational losses.

It is not a question of when to use it, but there really are no good reasons not to use it, except that they are a little bit bigger, which is not a reason for me. :)

[daltoned]

Thanks Joseph and Jerry for your replies and confirmation as to the benefits of using Raw.
regards
EddieD

[LensBaby]

To me there isn't any other option than RAW. I love RAW! I have made my photos perfect just by shooting raw. I only use jpeg for catalog purposes. Other than that it is Raw all of the way for me. What was his point in saying that about Jpeg? I am curious now.

[daltoned]

Hi Lensbaby, thanks for your reply on this question. To quote the full item " USE THE CAMERA'S HIGHEST QUALITY SETTING, but avoid the raw or tiff settings unless you have a specific need for these formats, such as printing large images. You can always reduce the size of an image but you cannot put back quality that is not already in the image ". As I said initially I had got to the point of starting to use Raw and in fact had used this to some degree on my previous camera (Fuji S9600), and now have set my camera to capture in both raw & jpeg.
EddieD

[LensBaby]

Hi Lensbaby, thanks for your reply on this question. To quote the full item " USE THE CAMERA'S HIGHEST QUALITY SETTING, but avoid the raw or tiff settings unless you have a specific need for these formats, such as printing large images. You can always reduce the size of an image but you cannot put back quality that is not already in the image ". As I said initially I had got to the point of starting to use Raw and in fact had used this to some degree on my previous camera (Fuji S9600), and now have set my camera to capture in both raw & jpeg.
EddieD

That is what I do, but Raw has really helped me in some serious situations before.

[timmo]

wellfor me...just your average amatuer...RAW has opened a whole new universe for me. I cannot think of a reason to not use it.I would say it gives you the full picture( pardon the pun) and then lets you decide the final outcome, not have the camera decide that isssue for you.

[saykimchi]

It could have been a recommendation for someone who is only interested in taking the pictures that they see, and not towards post-processing (ie you don't need special software to review JPEGs on a computer). I know when I started using the camera that I have now, I found RAW to be very intimidating, if only because I needed to learn Photoshop or some other post processing software. It could have also been written for a less-technology/computer-savvy audience. I know I've come across a few pieces of literature that recommend JPEG over RAW, but mostly in beginner/basic articles.

[jerryph]

One of the biggest advantages to RAW, over and above the fact that it contains the most data and therefore, the most detail contained in your picture, is the fact that white balance is easily corrected. This is something that in JPEG is highly difficult, sometimes impossible and you end up scrapping more potentially good pictures.

If you google "RAW vs JPG", you will find literally hundreds of articles that basically all say the same... that RAW is clearly the better way, though yeah, you may have to spend a couple hours learning a new software. Honestly, this is no big deal, and should be considered part of your photography education.

If you spent thousands for a camera and equipment, I see no reason why someone cannot learn to use a software that converts from RAW to JPG. Trust me, once you really get into it, you will find that converting from RAW to other formats will not only result in nicer pictures for you, but will soon be so 2nd nature that you will be chuckling to yourself at how easy it is. :)

[laura]

Once you start using RAW you won't want to go back to Jpeg. Its in a completely different league.