# RAW or JPEG???



## Daydream22 (Jul 6, 2013)

Hello all,  


When taking photos should I be using raw or jpeg.   I took a class and the teacher said to shoot in raw.   A friend took another class teacher said to shoot in jpeg.  Any suggestions?

Thanks


----------



## weepete (Jul 6, 2013)

Raw for ones you want to keep and edit. Jpeg for snapshots and ones you won't edit. Really the benifit in shooting raw is the extra headroom in post.


----------



## Light Guru (Jul 6, 2013)

Daydream22 said:


> Hello all,
> 
> 
> When taking photos should I be using raw or jpeg.   I took a class and the teacher said to shoot in raw.   A friend took another class teacher said to shoot in jpeg.  Any suggestions?
> ...



Do a search this has been discussed countless times. You will find more then enough discussion on the topic.


----------



## KmH (Jul 6, 2013)

The difference between Raw and JPEG is mainly about *bit depth*.
But a Raw image is an unfinished image the photographer has to, well finish, using Raw conversion software.
JPEG is intended to be a finished ready-to-print file type that has already been 'finished' in the camera. Many photographers prefer to do the 'finishing' them selves because the camera is just a dumb (inanimate) machine that is running a program written by software engineers long before you ever took the photo.
Put another way, how much artistic control are you willing to grant the machine?

DSLR cameras make 12-bit or 14-bit Raw image files. JPEG is limited to an 8-bit color depth.

A 8-bit digital number - 11111111 - can represent only 256 distinct gradations of tone (color).
A 12-bit digital number - 111111111111 - can represent only 4096 distinct gradations of tone (color).
A 14-bit digital number - 11111111111111 - can represent only 16,384 distinct gradations of tone (color).

Since digital images are based on the RGB color model, a digital image has 3 color channels - Red, Green, and Blue.

So a JPEG is also known as a 24-bit image because it has 3, 8-bit color channels - 3 color channels x 8-bits per color channel = 24-bit digital image.
By the same token a 12-bit digital image is also known as a 36-bit image - 3 color channels times 12-bits per color channel = 32-bit digital image.

Raw files have to be converted into an actual image outside of the camera in one of the many Raw Converters.
JPEGs are most often made right in the camera, thought eh camera starts with a Raw file for every image it delivers.
But to make a JPEG in the camera, the camera has to discard a lot of the color information the camera image sensor actually recorded.

FWIW, the image sensor in a digital camera actually cannot record color, the image sensor can only record luminosity. Color has to be interpolated based on a filter (Bayer Array) in front of the image sensor.
These and and other fundamental concepts are found in this group of related tutorials - Photo Editing Tutorials


----------



## Juga (Jul 6, 2013)

RAW! Because if you yell it with a deep and scratchy voice it kind of sounds like a dinosaur...which is cool for everyone involved.


----------



## tecboy (Jul 6, 2013)

I started out shooting jpeg until this forum convinced me to shoot raw file format.  I used to shoot raw, edit, export to hi-res jpeg, and delete all my raw files to save storage space.  Now, I keep all my raw files because on the market, portable hard drives are getting cheaper and the capacities are getting larger .  If you going to be a photographer far a long time and enjoy editing photos, shoot raw.  You get better quality and you can edit photos again and again.


----------



## Buckster (Jul 6, 2013)

weepete said:


> Raw for ones you want to keep and edit. Jpeg for snapshots and ones you won't edit.


I never know for sure which ones I will want to keep and edit and further distribute by some means.  Even when I think I'm just making a few snapshots and expect them be throwaways, I could get a shot that just screams WOW for some reason.

Therefore, I always shoot RAW, all the time, no exceptions - ever.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 6, 2013)

Buckster said:


> .......Therefore, I always shoot RAW, all the time, no exceptions - ever.



The only time I shoot JPEG is when it's either to simply post a sample on the innernets, or to email someone.  Past that, it's raw all day, every day.

The 'keepers' I'm scanning from my Kodachrome archives are full-bore 7200 dpi TIFFs, since the scanner doesn't do 'raw'.


----------



## kathyt (Jul 6, 2013)

For all of my pro work I shoot in RAW, and then for most of my personal work I shoot in Jpeg. Unless it is something really cool that I know I will be blowing highlights left and right. Then I will shoot both so I know I will at least have the RAW files if I need them. If I don't then I will dump them.


----------



## DarkShadow (Jul 6, 2013)

started out jpeg then moved to raw for all shots.


----------



## JClishe (Jul 7, 2013)

Buckster said:


> Therefore, I always shoot RAW, all the time, no exceptions - ever.



Ditto.

I'm on vacation with the family as I type this, got in from the beach about 30 minutes ago. Took some snapshots of my boy's playing in the water with my EOS-M and they were in RAW. I'll use an auto develop preset on them when I import them into LR but you never know, there might be a couple in the bunch that I really like and either want or need to clean up further.


----------



## hopdaddy (Jul 7, 2013)

I shoot RAW only. If I wanted to us the camera's default JEPG settings, Couldn't I just use ,or set-up a pre-set in ACR?


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

JPEG! Raw is a crutch used by lesser photographers who lack the self confidence/knowledge to get it right in camera.


----------



## mwild (Jul 7, 2013)

I use jpeg when the photos are more for personal documenting.  I don't have the time to edit all the photos I take.. I'd live in a cave glued to my computer 24/7 if I did!  When I'm shooting for a client then definitely RAW is the way to go.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> JPEG! Raw is a crutch used by lesser photographers who lack the self confidence/knowledge to get it right in camera.



Raw is a tool used by those who know how to use it properly.  Calling it a crutch means you don't understand it fully.


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

480sparky said:
			
		

> Raw is a tool used by those who know how to use it properly.  Calling it a crutch means you don't understand it fully.



Learn how to use your camera properly and then you will not need raw.


----------



## tecboy (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That makes no sense at all.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Tell me *all the possible future needs* for *every shot I take* and I'll happily convert back to JPEG.  Until you do, I prefer to have *ALL *the abilities to *EDIT* my photos in the *FUTURE*.


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

tecboy said:
			
		

> That makes no sense at all.



Yes it does


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

480sparky said:
			
		

> Tell me all the possible future needs for every shot I take and I'll happily convert back to JPEG.  Until you do, I prefer to have ALL the abilities to EDIT my photos in the FUTURE.



No need to. Get it right in camera, and any edit that can be done on raw can be done on jpeg.


----------



## Tailgunner (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> JPEG! Raw is a crutch used by lesser photographers who lack the self confidence/knowledge to get it right in camera.


----------



## Juga (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Learn how to properly edit and you won't need jpeg. I don't disagree that one should try to get framing and everything right in camera but that doesn't mean to completely ditch the idea of editing altogether.


----------



## Tailgunner (Jul 7, 2013)

Juga said:


> Superfitz said:
> 
> 
> > 480sparky said:
> ...



Hum...if you don't need Jpeg, what form of files do you give your clients? Surely you don't give them RAW files?


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

Juga said:
			
		

> Learn how to properly edit and you won't need jpeg.



False...save time and let your camera do the baseline editing.


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

Tailgunner said:
			
		

> Hum...if you don't need Jpeg, what form of files do you give your clients? Surely you don't give them RAW files?



Splendid question


----------



## Juga (Jul 7, 2013)

Tailgunner said:


> Juga said:
> 
> 
> > Superfitz said:
> ...



I thought it was assumed that the discussion is the form to shoot in...not what final form the images are. But you know what they say about assuming!

As for baseline editing in camera...no thanks. I like to have the ability to change contrast, saturation, highlights, etc. so on and so forth.


----------



## ShaneF (Jul 7, 2013)

If you like having less control and dont want to less control on the outcome of your photo quality by all means shoot jpeg.  For people who care and want the best possible outcome with more options raw is the way to go.

You dont have the control over a jpeg like you do a raw file plain and simple*.

*Its about having more control of the final product. But getting it right dosent hurt lol.
*
10 Reasons why you should be shooting raw


*


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

Juga said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> As for baseline editing in camera...no thanks. I like to have the ability to change contrast, saturation, highlights, etc. so on and so forth.




If you use your camera correctly 100% of the time the raw edits will look just like the jpeg


----------



## Benco (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No it doesn't


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

ShaneF said:
			
		

> If you like having very little control and dont want to make any decisions on the outcome of your photo quality by all means shoot jpeg.  For people who care and want the best possible outcome with more options raw is the way to go.
> 
> You dont have the control over a jpeg like you do a raw file plain and simple.
> 
> ...



You will find many professional photographers who shoot in jpeg. You absolutely have the same amount of control as you do with a raw file if you know how to properly use your camera. The link you provided is just some scrub who is giving his personal opinion. I could do the same thing about jpeg.


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

Benco said:
			
		

> No it doesn't



Yes it does


----------



## Juga (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> Juga said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That is not true. What if I wanted to add more contrast to the image to give it the look and feel I am trying to vision than the jpeg in camera processing can give me? As Shane just stated, it is a way to have more control over the final product which does eventually get converted into jpeg. But when shooting RAW is the way to go at least for clients. Getting composition and frame right in camera is a very different topic.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> No need to. Get it right in camera, and any edit that can be done on raw can be done on jpeg.



I nominate this post for the _TPF I Don't Know What I'm Talking About Award_ for the month of July.


----------



## Buckster (Jul 7, 2013)

480sparky said:


> Superfitz said:
> 
> 
> > No need to. Get it right in camera, and any edit that can be done on raw can be done on jpeg.
> ...


Seconded.


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

480sparky said:
			
		

> I nominate this post for the TPF I Don't Know What I'm Talking About Award for the month of July.



It should be nominated for that award because of all the pro raw fools. Jpeg is the greatest format period...times infinity!!! Bam! You can't get better than that. I am right..that's all there is to it. Now I sleep.


----------



## Ysarex (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> Juga said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's complete rubbish and nonsense. The camera processing software can't think and it can't see and it simply isn't equally capable regardless of the contrast and saturation controls available on camera.

We've been through this before too many times. Recently in this thread: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...nces-between-raw-jpeg-edited-16-bit-mode.html We got the camera out and provided *hard photographic evidence* that raw capture and hands on editing can deliver a photo that the camera JPEG engine is not capable of matching. That thread contains *proof* that it's not possible to get it right SOOC.

Joe


----------



## Juga (Jul 7, 2013)

Please Buck tell this fool something. Turn this thread into a 90 post bashing.


----------



## ShaneF (Jul 7, 2013)

if i did my editing in Microsoft paint id probably shot jpeg too.

You cant manipulate information that is not there.


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

Ysarex said:
			
		

> That's complete rubbish and nonsense. The camera processing software can't think and it can't see and it simply isn't equally capable regardless of the contrast and saturation controls available on camera.
> 
> We've been through this before too many times. Recently in this thread: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/beyond-basics/328218-challenge-noticeable-differences-between-raw-jpeg-edited-16-bit-mode.html We got the camera out and provided hard photographic evidence that raw capture and hands on editing can deliver a photo that the camera JPEG engine is not capable of matching. That thread contains proof that it's not possible to get it right SOOC.
> 
> Joe



That thread is complete rubbish and nonsense. Everything I've said in this thread is correct.


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

ShaneF said:
			
		

> if i did my editing in Microsoft paint id probably shot jpeg too.
> 
> You cant manipulate information that is not there.



Get it right in camera and Microsoft paint is all you need. Actually I have a Mac so I just use preview.


----------



## ShaneF (Jul 7, 2013)

The man on the corner with the sign saying jesus is coming really does believe that too. Wonder if he shoots Jpeg?


----------



## Juga (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



:Sniff: :sniff:  .... I smell troll.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> It should be nominated for that award because of all the pro raw fools. Jpeg is the greatest format period...times infinity!!! Bam! You can't get better than that. I am right..that's all there is to it. Now I sleep.



 None are so blind of those who  refuse to see.

Obviously, you're the pinnacle of photography. Capable of sharing the Greats. I bow to your superiority.

And my mama always said, "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level the beat you with experience."

I'm done here.


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

ShaneF said:
			
		

> The man on the corner with the sign saying jesus is coming really does believe that too. Wonder if he shoots Jpeg?



See...that proves you know nothing about photography. You can't take photos with a sign.


----------



## Ysarex (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> ShaneF said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



All talk and no show is just noise -- go troll somewhere else.


----------



## Buckster (Jul 7, 2013)

Juga said:


> Please Buck tell this fool something. Turn this thread into a 90 post bashing.


That would be an exercise in futility, I'm afraid, as it plays right into the game he's up to here.

And, although it's not his first time, it's still a helluva job he's done trolling the forum this time, ya gotta admit.  He's managed to throw this thread off it's  tracks and careening toward a mod-lock with very little effort on his  part.


----------



## ShaneF (Jul 7, 2013)

you can if you shoot jpeg and edit it in paint.


----------



## tecboy (Jul 7, 2013)

Is it me, or this thread is funny?


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 7, 2013)

Ysarex said:
			
		

> All talk and no show is just noise -- go troll somewhere else.



Thank you for finally calling me out. My fingers are tired. Sorry OP for hijacking your thread. Bottom line is they both have their merits. If you read through the thread you read some good reasons to use raw.


----------



## ShaneF (Jul 7, 2013)

I would like to see some of your photos also. We will wait will you download some from google.


----------



## table1349 (Jul 7, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Remember folks, this poster is from the same state that gave us George, "there are WOMD over there among the Axis of Evil,"  Bush and Rick Perry.  I rest my case.


----------



## Juga (Jul 7, 2013)

Buckster said:


> Juga said:
> 
> 
> > Please Buck tell this fool something. Turn this thread into a 90 post bashing.
> ...



Yeah I didn't notice it until after I posted that ^^^^^.


----------



## Juga (Jul 7, 2013)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Superfitz said:
> 
> 
> > 480sparky said:
> ...



 and the Dallas Cowboys...yuck


----------



## ShaneF (Jul 7, 2013)

All jpeg's are bigger in texas


----------



## DarkShadow (Jul 7, 2013)

Raw is fresh food seasoned up nicely cooked tender and juicy yum yum.Jpeg is a hamburger cooked in the microwave.:lmao: Now pass the popcorn please.


----------



## Richichi (Jul 7, 2013)

Here's one example ... when you can't control the light during a shoot for whatever reasons let say a wedding ... how does one get it 100% right in camera? Raw would be a hell of a lot more helpful than jpegs - shooting in jpeg is ok for for snapshots and the such impo - even all film had to be processed - processing raw images is where it's at for the serious enthusiast/pro!


----------



## table1349 (Jul 7, 2013)

Juga said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > Superfitz said:
> ...



Don't you mean the Dallas Felons?


----------



## table1349 (Jul 7, 2013)

Richichi said:


> Here's one example ... when you can't control the light during a shoot for whatever reasons let say a wedding ... how does one get it 100% right in camera? Raw would be a hell of a lot more helpful than jpegs - shooting in jpeg is ok for for snapshots and the such impo - even all film had to be processed - processing raw images is where it's at for the serious enthusiast/pro!



Please..... Let us not use real world photographic situations in this thread.  It will confuse some people.  Remember Ansel Adams always got it right in the camera as well.  He never post processed in the darkroom.  Mater of fact, I believe he used a Walgreens to develop and print his film.


----------



## tecboy (Jul 7, 2013)

I Shoot Raw!


----------



## ShaneF (Jul 7, 2013)

Were is the "I shoot JPEG" section?


----------



## tecboy (Jul 8, 2013)

I think people want to shoot jpeg is about saving times and less time in files transfer.  They don't have to worry about buffer fills up quickly when shooting raw on their dslr.  Trying to get the pictures right by looking in the 3 inch screen maybe possible. However, your have to shoot a lot of pictures and compare each picture with different settings to see which setting is optimal for best picture quality.  Then stick with the optimal setting and shoot rest of the pictures and expect these to be also high quality.  They think jpeg is same quality or better than raw.  Those are the nonsenses I read in the internet.  I think these people are misinformed.


----------



## UnknownBro (Jul 8, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> JPEG! Raw is a crutch used by lesser photographers who lack the self confidence/knowledge to get it right in camera.


I've heard people say the same thing about flash shooter vs natural light.  I loled at them too. 

LOL


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 8, 2013)

I shoot both... and use the Jpegs quite a bit. I only touch the RAW files if I need to... and I don't touch them very often. Of course, having access to both is nice... but why RAW process images unless it is needed? Waste of time! Some images needed the extra latitude RAW provides... many don't (if shot properly in the first place). 

Superfitz may have been trolling, but he was right about getting it as close as possible IN Camera...


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Jul 8, 2013)

Superfitz said:


> Benco said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yawn



Superfitz said:


> It should be nominated for that award because of all the pro raw fools. Jpeg is the greatest format period...times infinity!!! Bam! You can't get better than that. I am right..that's all there is to it. Now I sleep.



It's one thing to troll. It's another thing to be bad at trolling. This is just... bad. 




Superfitz said:


> Get it right in camera and Microsoft paint is all you need. Actually I have a Mac so I just use preview.



*Bad *trolling. 





Superfitz said:


> Thank you for finally calling me out. My fingers are tired. Sorry OP for hijacking your thread. Bottom line is they both have their merits. If you read through the thread you read some good reasons to use raw.



Worth a suspension/ban IMO. Purposely posting inflammatory comments is foolish.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 10, 2013)

Go ahead, feed the trolls. Our natural habitat is being threatened by legitimate conversation!


----------

