I Will Not Shot in RAW

Started May 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Senior MemberPosts: 1,581Gear list
Re: There is a difference...
In reply to Norman B, May 24, 2013

Norman B wrote:

Alton (TN) wrote:

... but it is hard to explain.

An example that happened with me is from back in my 20D days.

Even though I wasn't sure what the implications were, I took the advice to always shoot using RAW and then convert. Just to be safe, I shot with RAW + JPG most of the time so I could decide later. So that is the way I shot, from time to time finding real advantages in adjusting exposure, WB, etc. when I having the raw file to work with.

Several years went by and I finally bought Lightroom. When migrating those old images into LR, I noticed that I was able to "revive" quite a few of them using the tools of LR, Adobe Bridge, and PS. The software had improved greatly over the years and having the original RAW file gave much more latitude to work with than just the old JPGs.

Keep in mind that your camera will adjust the RAW file to a JPG in camera and provide you with only the resulting JPG, discarding some of the information when you just shoot in JPG. When shooting RAW, you will always have "all" of the data if you need to go back and use it later. Sometimes it might do a better job of manipulating the data to suite you than you can, and sometimes it don't. Raw just gives you the option to choose. Over the years, I have had many otherwise ruined photos salvaged using the RAW file it was shot with.

For non critical photos, or some action photography for newsprint, it makes sense to go with JPG to cut down on PP time. For most of the other work, especially critical work, it makes sense to shoot RAW, or at perhaps RAW + JPG, so you have the choice later on if you want to refine the picture further.

Another reason I am a believer in using RAW is that the various training courses I have taken using LR, PS, Bridge, etc. all recommend and demonstrate that RAW is the way to go. Chris Orwig with Lynda.com has some nice examples that explain it much better than I can.

Anyway, RAW works great for me and I hope this helps. Good luck with whatever you choose.

-- hide signature --


Using RAW makes sense in terms of information stored in RAW vs JPEG. It even makes more sense to shoot RAW today for possible use down the road. People will acquire newer and better software/equipment as time goes by along with improved PP skills. A shot taken today cannot be reshot at some point in the future in many cases.

RAW does take up more storage space on an SD card but the cost of a SD card is so cheap now compared to days gone bye. A 32 GB SD Class 10 card is selling around the $30.00 range. I can remember paying $20.00 for a 512 MB card. The storage space use for RAW is really not much of an argument.  I think people could resolve this by being more selective in what they keep.

Well it is not like you can't go back to an old JPEG file and try to "revive" or "improve" it.  LR works on JPEGs also.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow