# When to use RAW vs JPEG on my trip?



## cbarnard7 (Aug 29, 2013)

Hi Everyone,

Sorry to beat a dead horse here (and to sound like such a rookie)-

I'm going on a week-long trip to some National Parks and although it is mostly based on the hikes and camping, I'm obviously going to take a lot of pictures (duh!). And, according to my past hikes around CO, I often take many, many photos (just to make sure I've gotten it right). Because I'm moving around a lot, I don't really have the time to sit, zoom in, and check every image for sharpness (and delete soft images). I'll be bringing a daypack that caters to photography, so I'll have about 12GB of memory cards and 3 batteries on me.

The question is (especially for those who do travel/on-the-fly photography)- when would you use either setting? I was thinking I would shoot most things in Jpeg (to save room) and move to RAW when I'm shooting my "best" pictures (pics I hope to print and heavily edit in LR5).

Or, should I just shoot everything in RAW and delete the "bad" ones while I'm in my tent at night to save space?

I eventually plan to print the best ones in a book (like a shutterfly-type) and edit/keep the others on an external HD.

Thanks in advance for your advice!


----------



## KmH (Aug 29, 2013)

On vacations I shot exclusively in Raw. Memory card are cheap.

JPEG offers so little editing headroom that I never used it for making personal photos I would likely later want to revisit and prep for printing.

Deleting images on the memory card while it is in the camera is not a good idea, because of the FAT (File Allocation Table).
Image file size is dependent to a large degree on image content. In other words a photo of a blank wall will be a somewhat smaller file than a shot made of the same wall but wilh a framed picture hanging on it.

If the FAT tries to use the memory card space freed up by deleting an image and the new image file is just a bit larger than the free space, you could wind up with a corrupted image file or a memory card that now has a FAT that is no longer accurate for any image on the card.


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 29, 2013)

I agree with Keith.  Shoot raw, especially because you will be on vacation...and likely in places that you may not get back to soon...or ever.  

Memory cards are cheap...just buy more and don't worry about it.


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 29, 2013)

Just an example
Transcend 32GB CompactFlash Memory Card 400x UDMA TS32GCF400 B&H
Transcend 32GB SDHC Memory Card Class 10 TS32GSDHC10 B&H Photo
Amazon.com: SanDisk SDSDRH-064G-A11 64GB ULTRA SDXC Card: Electronics
Transcend 64GB Compact Flash (CF) 400X Flash Card Model TS64GCF400 - Newegg.com


----------



## badrano (Aug 29, 2013)

I would get more memory.  I have a 32Gb card and it can hold almost 900 RAW pics (I think it's around 890 something).  With a 12Gb card, you might only have room for some 300 RAW pics.

Knowing me, I could easily burn through 300 pics on a week long vacation in scenic areas.  I was on a week long Alaskan cruise last year and between the Point and Shoot and my film slr, I shot over 400 pics.  Since the cruise, I finally went DLSR....carried too many rolls of film on the cruise :mrgreen:


----------



## cbarnard7 (Aug 29, 2013)

Thanks for the advice! I only have an 8 and a 4 GB card at the moment (always sufficient for my day-hikes!) But, I'm thinking I should buy a 32GB card instead then. 

On the subject of cards, do you believe it's better to have 1 or 2 big cards (32GB+) or several, smaller ones? I've heard the smaller are better in case you lose one- you don't lose everything. But, I also don't want to keep switching them out!

Maybe I can use the 32GB card for all my raw files and use an 8GB for video? I can't see myself taking all that much video, but you never know I guess.


----------



## Buckster (Aug 29, 2013)

I always shoot RAW, no matter what.  I use 4 CF cards that total 52GB.  

I used to also bring along a 60GB portable battery operated card reader/storage device I have, transfer the files to it, then put the CF card back in the camera and format it for fresh use again.  Mine's pretty old, but still works great.  I see those types of portable transfer/storage devices now hold 500GB for about $150, or even more data for more money.

These days, I just bring along my laptop and do such data transfers into that, then back up to small external 1TB drives.  But then again, at my age (54), I don't sleep in tents much, preferring the conveniences of motels and hotels, where power is readily available.

In any case, I would advise more storage, whether that's more cards for the camera or portable storage device(s) to transfer to so that the card(s) can be reused.


----------



## Buckster (Aug 29, 2013)

cbarnard7 said:


> On the subject of cards, do you believe it's better to have 1 or 2 big cards (32GB+) or several, smaller ones? I've heard the smaller are better in case you lose one- you don't lose everything. But, I also don't want to keep switching them out!


Several smaller ones, for the reason you cited.  There's an old saying: Never put all your eggs in one basket.

Besides, really now - how hard is it to switch them out as they fill up?  It's worth it.


----------



## cbarnard7 (Aug 29, 2013)

Buck- 

Off topic, but I read a little about your camera gear on your site. You have your own microscope!? Working as a histologist in a research lab, I can really appreciate that! Our pictures from the scope may vary from yours (unless you photograph cancer tissue!) but that is super cool!


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 29, 2013)

I'm torn on the 'eggs in the basket' issue.  Yes, if you use several cards, you may prevent the problem of loosing all of your photos (had they been in on one card).  But on the other hand, I'm much, much more likely to loose a card if I'm shuffling cards between the camera and a pocket or camera bag etc.  

With one large card, it may never have to leave the camera while in the field.  Much less chance of loosing it.  And personally, I think that physically loosing or misplacing a card is a greater risk than having a card get corrupted to the point of loosing the images on it.  (knock on wood).  

I've been mainly using a single 32GB card (the one linked above) and so far, I've never even come close to filling it on a single trip/shoot.  (although, I'm sure I could with a longer or photocentric trip.)


----------



## Buckster (Aug 29, 2013)

cbarnard7 said:


> Buck-
> 
> Off topic, but I read a little about your camera gear on your site. You  have your own microscope!? Working as a histologist in a research lab, I  can really appreciate that!  Our pictures from the scope may vary from yours (unless you photograph  cancer tissue!) but that is super cool!


Yeah, it's a lot of fun,  though I haven't viewed or photographed any cancer tissue (which is kind  of ironic, since I have NHL, diagnosed 13 years ago this coming  October).  

Here's a couple shots of the microscope I made: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-gallery/306609-research.html

Here's a couple shots I made using the microscope: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/macro-photography/283553-beyond-macro.html



Big Mike said:


> I'm torn on the 'eggs in the basket' issue.  Yes, if you use several cards, you may prevent the problem of loosing all of your photos (had they been in on one card).  But on the other hand, I'm much, much more likely to loose a card if I'm shuffling cards between the camera and a pocket or camera bag etc.
> 
> With one large card, it may never have to leave the camera while in the field.  Much less chance of loosing it.  And personally, I think that physically loosing or misplacing a card is a greater risk than having a card get corrupted to the point of loosing the images on it.  (knock on wood).


I use a Sandisk CF card wallet/keychain that I keep in my pocket.  It holds the 3 CF cards I'm not using at the moment, while the 4th is in the camera.  In 11 years of shooting digital, I haven't lost a card yet.

Similarly, in the 30+ years of film shooting, I never lost a roll of film, though I carried MANY and switched out MANY on my many field trips, and even had them stored in my bag and had to go in and out of it to deal with them.

Maybe I'm just lucky that way.

I guess what it comes down to is that I just trust my own competence more than I trust that an electronic storage device would never fail, but that's just me.


----------



## Dao (Aug 29, 2013)

I will go with at least 16GB or 32GB nowadays.    If you do not want to keep everything in one basket, they get few of the 16/32GB cards.  You do not need to fill them up before you swap them.   But it comes in handy if you need the extra space during vacations. Especially for those who want to shoot some videos as well as photos.

Bring a small notebook and dump the photos/video from the cards to it is what I will do unless I need to travel as light as possible.


----------



## hirejn (Aug 29, 2013)

Although I recommend shooting always RAW, in your situation you might be better with JPEG simply because 12GB is not a lot of storage, and deleting pictures takes up battery. The solution of switching to RAW for a few of the more serious attempts should work. For reference, the D300 battery lasts about 8 hours of regular use, sometimes less. So three batteries might not be enough for a week. If you invested in a couple of 16GB cards, it would make the decision to go RAW easier. I don't know the exact number but RAW is something like four times the size of a JPEG, so that's a big difference. 

The only time I ever shoot JPEG is if a freelance client demands it, and it has happened. It doesn't bother me because I'm getting paid and my exposures are perfect, and those times the client does the processing. For my own jobs I shoot everything RAW for the development potential. When you master exposure, there's no need to bracket except for HDR.


----------



## hirejn (Aug 29, 2013)

Here's my theory on cards: I don't think there are any stats to show one method works better than another. You have about an equal chance of one large card having errors as one of two smaller cards having errors. The more cards you have, the more chances one will have errors. The difference is you risk losing half your shots vs. all of them. But there's no guarantee that if you have two cards both of them wont' have errors. I'd rather just pack as much as I can on one card before changing, and right now the 16GB is a sweet spot for me. Ideally, I would have a camera with two slots so I could shoot backups to one card, but I don't have that.


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 29, 2013)

Buckster said:


> Big Mike said:
> 
> 
> > I'm torn on the 'eggs in the basket' issue.  Yes, if you use several cards, you may prevent the problem of loosing all of your photos (had they been in on one card).  But on the other hand, I'm much, much more likely to loose a card if I'm shuffling cards between the camera and a pocket or camera bag etc.
> ...



I don't think I've ever lost a card or a roll of film either...but since having kids (and generally getting old)...I seem to misplace something every other day.  

Point well taken though.


----------



## Gavjenks (Aug 29, 2013)

I just buy enough cards to shoot RAW+jpeg for every shot.

For most shots I use the jpeg in post processing because it's way faster and more convenient and I usually get the exposure correct, etc. and don't need to do any major editing or color correction.  But the RAW is there waiting in the wings for any shots that i do decide I want to do major or repeated edits to.

For about 1/10th of the cost of a nice lens, it is a pretty no-brainer investment to get a couple of 32 gig cards.


----------



## 16BitTons (Aug 29, 2013)

I try to keep myself out of situations where I wish I had more battery or more memory. Bring extra cards.  You can always save one in reserve for jpeg only, in case you are filling up faster than you planned.


----------



## Stevepwns (Aug 29, 2013)

As small and cheap memory cards are....   I always have 6 16 gig cards on me.  Ive only used 4 in an given day but I think my A77 shoots a 24mb file.  I also do a lot of video.  Video takes up space....a lot.


----------



## bratkinson (Aug 30, 2013)

Count me in the 16gb card camp. I've used nothing but Sandisk cards for USB flash drives as well as camera memory for at least 10 years now, without any problems. So using only one doesn't cause me any worries. 

I shoot RAW + JPG (RAW->CF, JPG->SD) on my 5D3, and fill CF cards way quicker than I used to on the 60D SDs. So I carry a 'safety color' lime green CF+SD case in my bag or pocket. Buckster...I like your idea of clipping it on a key chain! I will definitely buy one today!

Edit:  I DID lose a roll of film for 10 years...My 2nd honeymoon, no less!


----------



## Murray Bloom (Aug 30, 2013)

cbarnard, I agree with the rest.  Several smaller cards, or maybe a pair of 16s.

Regarding microscopes, mine comes in handy for shots like this; some of my brain cells.  How I got them out is an interesting story.  Also posting the setup:


----------



## JClishe (Aug 30, 2013)

I shoot RAW(CF) + JPG(SD) but *ONLY* because my SD card is an Eye-Fi. I save S1 jpg's to it then wirelessly transfer them to Photosmith on my iPad, where I do my first pass star rating / select review. Once I get back to my PC I import the RAW's from my CF to Lightroom then do a metadata-only sync of the jpg's from Photosmith which matches up the star ratings with the RAW's.

I shot about 600 images at Ironman Louisville last weekend and I had them all star-rated before I even got home; Stopped at a restaraunt for dinner and brought my iPad in with me and reviewed everything right there. It's a great system, Photosmith has completely changed my workflow. I realize this is a little off-topic from your original question but thought I'd throw it out there anyway.


----------



## cbarnard7 (Aug 30, 2013)

Buckster said:


> cbarnard7 said:
> 
> 
> > Buck-
> ...



Wow! 13 years and still kickin' ass! That's awesome man, congrats! I actually cut a lot of lymph tissue (as what's normal in most cancer case diagnosis), but all of the PhD/MD's here at the university I work at use mice models that have (sadly) been injected with genes that promote tumor growth. And, they are normally for dermatopathological research only. But, at the hospital I used to work at, where it's a huge variety of things (from gastric ulcers to breast cancer) I've cut and stained many tissue biopsies used to diagnose NHL and other cancers. It's unfortunate, but I take pride in doing my job well to make sure the pathologist can correctly diagnose the issue sooner and more efficiently.

Sorry from jumping off topic, but it's awesome to hear stories like yours!

Here's some pictures that I took yesterday, I think you'll enjoy them!

Kidney Section (Stained with Hematoxylin & Eosin)



Liver Section (H&E)



Skin Section (H&E)



Skin stained with Trichrome stain (sections stained blue are collagen [in this case used to determine elasticity problems])


----------



## cbarnard7 (Aug 30, 2013)

JClishe said:


> I shoot RAW(CF) + JPG(SD) but *ONLY* because my SD card is an Eye-Fi. I save S1 jpg's to it then wirelessly transfer them to Photosmith on my iPad, where I do my first pass star rating / select review. Once I get back to my PC I import the RAW's from my CF to Lightroom then do a metadata-only sync of the jpg's from Photosmith which matches up the star ratings with the RAW's.
> 
> I shot about 600 images at Ironman Louisville last weekend and I had them all star-rated before I even got home; Stopped at a restaraunt for dinner and brought my iPad in with me and reviewed everything right there. It's a great system, Photosmith has completely changed my workflow. I realize this is a little off-topic from your original question but thought I'd throw it out there anyway.



I'm interested to see how your photos came out! That's great info, and something for me to look into although you seem to really have all the technology down pat!


----------



## cbarnard7 (Aug 30, 2013)

Murray Bloom said:


> cbarnard, I agree with the rest. Several smaller cards, or maybe a pair of 16s.
> 
> Regarding microscopes, mine comes in handy for shots like this; some of my brain cells. How I got them out is an interesting story. Also posting the setup:
> 
> View attachment 54197 View attachment 54198



Man, you and Buck are awesome for having your own scopes at home. My wife is a microbiologist and since we both use them daily, we've thought about getting one. Although, since we use them everyday, we can secretly bring anything really neat to the lab at work anyway. I'm actually interested in how you've gotten hold of brain cells!


----------



## Murray Bloom (Aug 30, 2013)

Chris, rather than write it all again, here's the brain cell story that I originally posted on another forum:

Fine Art Discussion - Fine Art America


----------



## cbarnard7 (Aug 30, 2013)

Murray Bloom said:


> Chris, rather than write it all again, here's the brain cell story that I originally posted on another forum:
> 
> Fine Art Discussion - Fine Art America



I liked the Dremel part the best. Now all you have to do is wait for a lawsuit! You said that it was a close-up of a Cliché Verre you did? Pretty awesome! 

I will say- your take on brain cells is much more exciting than how it actually turns out. Although I will say, doing an immunofluorescence stain on some is pretty awesome!


----------



## SkipT (Sep 8, 2013)

Thats why I went with 2 32 gig cards in my D7000 I know if I switch them out I will lose one or distroy it some how


----------



## minicoop1985 (Sep 8, 2013)

I very much appreciate this thread, as I had no idea what to do with RAW vs. JPEG prior to reading this. Then again, I'd never really tried editing much. I might give it a better shot now.



Murray Bloom said:


> Chris, rather than write it all again, here's the brain cell story that I originally posted on another forum:
> 
> Fine Art Discussion - Fine Art America



While it's really cool, this is also one of the strangest things I have ever read.


----------



## snerd (Sep 9, 2013)

I shoot only RAW, all of the time. Being a newbie, perhaps I haven't learned any hard lessons yet, but I use a 64GB card and the grip holds 2 batteries so I can shoot way beyond most anything I can imagine. Big cards, 2 batteries, have fun!!


----------



## Eclectix (Sep 9, 2013)

There is only one time when I shoot jpeg anymore, and that is when photographing kids playing, sports, or anything like that which requires rapid bursts, because RAW takes more time to write to the card and can bog down my camera under those conditions. One thing I hate is missing a shot while I'm waiting for my camera to process the shot I just took. It doesn't happen nearly as often with my new camera as it did with my old one, but it can still happen occasionally if I'm shooting many bursts in RAW. Probably not an issue for really high-end cameras with outstanding processing speeds, but worth a mention.


----------



## anthonyc12 (Sep 20, 2013)

I always shoot raw, and when traveling I think there is all that much more reason to do so -- if I'm shooting someplace I might never be back to, I want to keep all my options open. I consider storage a non-issue since memory cards are so cheap today compared with past years. Just buy more cards. Converting to jpg is also a non-issue to me -- images that are going to be ok-as-shot in jpg are also going to be ok-as-shot in raw, so I just run a batch process and go eat dinner (or go to bed) while they convert on the computer when I get back home. You only have to do hands-on post-processing with the ones that need it.

Anthony Cole
Design Build Company


----------



## Newtricks (Sep 20, 2013)

Last time I was on holiday in Colorado (1991), I burned 300 feet of Kodak technical pan and 100 feet of Tri pan over a time period of six weeks, didn't have the luxury of deleting the bad ones at night. A 32 gb card will hold 900 images, so I'd advise buying a number of memory cards and sorting through your photos once you are back at home.


----------



## cynicaster (Sep 20, 2013)

I know it&#8217;s a terribly unpopular stance to have in the DSLR community but I&#8217;ll go rogue and say it anyway: you&#8217;ll probably be just fine shooting JPEG only when snapping hundreds of photos on a vacation (Hey look, a rock!  <snap>  Hey look an old monument!  <snap>  Time for a selfie in front of this cool looking tree!  <snap>, you get the idea). 

If, on the other hand, you&#8217;re going to put a significant amount of effort into &#8220;setting up&#8221; a particular shot, like, say, a long exposure of a stream, a sunset, etc., then RAW makes a lot of sense because you know up front that you&#8217;re going to be spending much more time on that particular image in the computer. 

Of course, as somebody already mentioned, doing JPEG+RAW is probably the best of both worlds, if you can get enough cards that you won&#8217;t run into space problems.  This is what I do these days, and end up not even using the vast majority of RAW files.  Personally, I don&#8217;t bother with the RAW version &#8220;just because&#8221;; I only do it if 1) the image is a bona fide keeper (duh), and 2) I see something I don&#8217;t like in the JPEG produced by the camera.


----------



## raventepes (Sep 20, 2013)

cynicaster said:


> I know its a terribly unpopular stance to have in the DSLR community but Ill go rogue and say it anyway: youll probably be just fine shooting JPEG only when snapping hundreds of photos on a vacation (Hey look, a rock!  <snap>  Hey look an old monument!  <snap>  Time for a selfie in front of this cool looking tree!  <snap>, you get the idea).
> 
> If, on the other hand, youre going to put a significant amount of effort into setting up a particular shot, like, say, a long exposure of a stream, a sunset, etc., then RAW makes a lot of sense because you know up front that youre going to be spending much more time on that particular image in the computer.
> 
> Of course, as somebody already mentioned, doing JPEG+RAW is probably the best of both worlds, if you can get enough cards that you wont run into space problems.  This is what I do these days, and end up not even using the vast majority of RAW files.  Personally, I dont bother with the RAW version just because; I only do it if 1) the image is a bona fide keeper (duh), and 2) I see something I dont like in the JPEG produced by the camera.



I couldn't agree more. I usually shoot in JPEG+RAW. Sometimes, the JPEG is all you need. Sometimes, if you screw up, say the exposure of a shot, its easy enough to fix, post process.


----------



## cbarnard7 (Sep 20, 2013)

cynicaster said:


> I know it&#8217;s a terribly unpopular stance to have in the DSLR community but I&#8217;ll go rogue and say it anyway: you&#8217;ll probably be just fine shooting JPEG only when snapping hundreds of photos on a vacation (Hey look, a rock! <snap> Hey look an old monument! <snap> Time for a selfie in front of this cool looking tree! <snap>, you get the idea).
> 
> If, on the other hand, you&#8217;re going to put a significant amount of effort into &#8220;setting up&#8221; a particular shot, like, say, a long exposure of a stream, a sunset, etc., then RAW makes a lot of sense because you know up front that you&#8217;re going to be spending much more time on that particular image in the computer.
> 
> Of course, as somebody already mentioned, doing JPEG+RAW is probably the best of both worlds, if you can get enough cards that you won&#8217;t run into space problems. This is what I do these days, and end up not even using the vast majority of RAW files. Personally, I don&#8217;t bother with the RAW version &#8220;just because&#8221;; I only do it if 1) the image is a bona fide keeper (duh), and 2) I see something I don&#8217;t like in the JPEG produced by the camera.



I actually shot in RAW the whole time to "be safe" but yes, I agree with you and will do this from now on! It's super easy to switch between modes and many of the pics weren't set-up shots (although the ones that were I'm happy were shot in RAW). I think JPEG+RAW is nice, but since I bracket a lot and I take so many pictures, I'd rather not have double the junk ones to go through!


----------



## Tinderbox (UK) (Sep 20, 2013)

Yeah, shoot RAW, or RAW+JPEG also i recommend Samsung Memory Cards they are extremely well made, i have had a few cheaper brands fall apart on me.



> [h=3]From the Manufacturer[/h]  Get the most out of your DSLR camera or HD  camcorder with the Samsung SDHC Pro UHS-1 Class 10 Memory Card. This  card delivers the speed necessary to support rapid photo capture and  seamless HD video recording. It also boasts a rugged, resilient design  that protects your data from the elements. And thanks to its generous 32  GB capacity, it can store thousands of photos and hours of video. The  card is compatible with cameras, laptops, and other devices that accept  SDHC cards.
> 
> 
> [h=5]Harness the Potential of Your DSLR Camera[/h]Boasting  data transfer speeds up to 80 MB/s, the Samsung SDHC Pro UHS-1 Class 10  Memory Card is fast enough to keep up with even the most rapid photo  shooting. The card's fast data speeds decrease the lag time between  shots, allowing you to capture up to ten 8 MB photos in a single second.
> ...



John.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Sep 20, 2013)

OP, I just shoot RAW+. I don't fool around like that...changing back and forth.


----------



## play18now (Sep 21, 2013)

Memory is so cheap these days it's not worth it to sacrifice the image quality for a little extra space.  I shoot everything in RAW except for sports (for buffering and burst reasons).  Draw on experience and try to budget how many photos you are likely to take in a day.  I know that in a full day of hiking in a National Park for me, I'll take about 300-400 pictures.  So if I was there for a week, I would bring enough space for roughly 3500+ pictures (give myself a little leeway, in case it's just too cool to not take a bunch of photos).  Plus memory cards add absolutely no weight to your pack.


----------



## StandingBear1983 (Sep 30, 2013)

If you can shoot always in RAW no matter what. i would rather buy cards then shoot in JPEG. also if you see that for some reason you cant afford the best and fastest card...its also fine to get the class 6 or even class 4 when your traveling...anyway most likely that you have a class 10 card already...so use that for video or birds or sport and the rest of the cards can go for normal single shoots that any card will work with them perfectly fine...you don't need the fastest and the most expensive card all the time...only sometimes. also folks that shoot JPEG with there DSLR's don't really take advantage of there DSLR's...its almost like shooting a slightly higher quality compact camera...specially when people shoot both on auto mode and JPEG with there DSLR's.


----------



## Kolia (Oct 1, 2013)

StandingBear1983 said:


> ...also folks that shoot JPEG with there DSLR's don't really take advantage of there DSLR's...its almost like shooting a slightly higher quality compact camera...specially when people shoot both on auto mode and JPEG with there DSLR's.



Lol ! You haven't used a point and shoot recently !  They are terrible at "getting the shoot" !!!

Jokes aside, I would also go RAW as much as possible. My thought is that if a picture isn't worth putting in an album of my vacation, it probably not worth keeping. And if it is worth keeping, I'll want to thinker with it a little bit. 

I'll be honest tho, I'd probably end up with indistinguishable results had I shoot in jpeg initially...

So I guess it's all subjective. It is "fun" to process our pictures. The "fun" is enhanced when shooting RAW.


----------



## Bulb (Oct 1, 2013)

Buy enough cards to shoot RAW, shoot RAW during the entire trip, sort through the images later, and batch export the ones you don't plan to edit again.

Then you won't need to slow down and decide whether or not you should use .jpeg or RAW. They're all RAW and you can decide which images aren't worth keeping as RAW.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Oct 3, 2013)

RAW seems to be muuuuch easier to work with in Lightroom. Granted, it lowers the capacity with a 4 gig card in my E-450 from 1500 or so to 230 photos, but it's worth it.


----------



## The_Traveler (Oct 3, 2013)

badrano said:


> I could easily burn through 300 pics on a week long vacation in scenic areas.



Cards are the simplest, cheapest thing to not worry about. 
On trips, it is easy to shoot 500 or 600 a day -

This isn't a situation where instant access is needed, so shoot raw and cull mercilessly when you get home.


----------



## cgipson1 (Oct 3, 2013)

I usually carry 4 32gb cards (Two CF and two SD)... and I have never filled them all up... even on a week long trip. When I am backcountry for a week or so, I also carry a CF tripod, at least one flash, a couple of pocket wizards, and whatever else I think I might need. Yea... Pack is heavy, but that is what I do.


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 3, 2013)

Best advice I can give you is, "it depends".   If your shooting something that doesn't move much or fast and you don't really need good action shots of it, such as a landscape or a portrait, use RAW.  It will give you more post processing abilities later.  If your shooting something that moves, particularly something that moves fast, JPG might be your best bet. A lot of cameras can only achieve a short burst with a decent number of frames per second before slowing to a crawl when shooting raw, and this can really limit your ability to capture action shots.  So if your shooting a sunset, a waterfall, or a monument by all means, RAW.  If your taking shots of a sporting event or someone else being mugged, most likely JPG.

I generally carry several spare memory cards myself, I also have a laptop that I take with me on longer trips so if my cards start filling up I can always download images to the laptops 1.5 tb drive.  No worries about running out of space there.


----------



## Seventen (Oct 4, 2013)

I would say shoot in RAW all the time its much more easier to fix something that has has gone wrong. I used to use RAW only for astrophotography and jpg for everything else until the day i went out changed from RAW to jpg and left white ballance in tungsten and monochrome, was a nice event but nothing to show for it. Its much easier just to stick with one or the other as can easily slip the mind to switch to the correct one.


----------



## dylanstraub (Oct 5, 2013)

My 2 cents: there is no choice between raw and jpeg. Raw is the format for all pictures regardless of where they are shot. Memory is cheap enough that everyone should have at least two high speed memory cards in their kit.


----------

