Question: What do you shoot?

To me it seemed obvious to shoot raw as it made post processing in photoshop easier, and gave me far more things to tweak. For some reason I've always stuck with RAW + Large Jpeg on my 400D, I've realised that I'm not sure this is the best way as I always end up with 2 copies of every image on the hard drive. Also given that adobe image can show thumbnails or RAW's and the Canon shows them on the rear screen just as quickly, what exactly is the point in having both? (That said, through years of practice, remembering to use Adobe bridge is a pain!)

The only advantage I have thought of is that if you just want to have a few printed and don't want to have to tweak at all, it's far quicker to have the jpeg's.

So, thoughts? Suggestions?

 

Generally RAW, but if I know i'm going to be shooting mass amounts of the same thing, large Jpeg.

 

Good news is I've got 6.25GB of CF cards now, but I'm worried it still wont be enough for Hong Kong/Australia, so I think I might just go with RAW (only)... Think the "camera raw" plugin is great, i'm a bit useless with the rest of photoshop!

 

hippies. uh, i mean, RAW.

 

I've not bothered shooting in Raw yet, I should start really.

 

RAW. Totally brah.

 

RAW every time. I love being able to fix it if there is something slightly wrong with the shot (certain lenses I have are quite desaturated)

 

RAW! Gives you far more flexibility. Shooting JPEGs is like taking your film in to be processed, and only getting prints back. The RAWs are your negatives.

 

RAW, without a doubt. I'll take virtually unlimited flexibility and 16 bit color over compressed JPEG garbage any day.

 

RAW, because it makes me feel more like a pro!

I bet that's the same reason most others really use it too

 

Personally, I shoot both RAW and JPEG.

If I'm just taking snapshots of a family birthday party, then I usually just use JPEG. It makes it easier on me because I don't have to convert 100-some-odd photos just so Aunt Sally can load up a CD on her Dell. Nobody is printing those any bigger than 5x6, so they won't really gain that much from the extra color or resolution - at least, not when they get them printed at Wal-Mart.

If I'm going to shoot something really memorable, or if I plan to do any real post work, then I shoot in RAW. Like Pookeyhead said, it's like working with a negative as opposed to a print.

-monkey

 

^^^^What he said.

 

deer and other small animals


I shoot jpeg

 

jpeg, 1500x1000 resolution. Just don't find myself needing anything bigger.

 

RAW, unless I have a need to shoot in jpeg. The one need I've found so far is those easy-share printers - they don't like RAW, so no instant prints with the thing unless I shoot in jpeg. Which only has happened once so far, and I couldn't imagine it stretching beyond a family outing.

 

RAW is awesome, but my non SLR shooter is too slow writing in that format. It takes a ***load of space, and having Adobe Lightroom I'm happy enough with flexibility of high quality JPEGS. So far RAW is just too slow for me; but more importantly I'd need more memory cards and I shoot way too many photos to buy HDDs left an right to keep all those RAW's

 

RAW. because it's more tasty.

 

My camera only lets me take shots in JPEG anf TIF. Yes thats right. TIF with one F. And no program i have found so far will open the friggin files.

So Jpeg for me

 

What camera are you using? I'm fairly certian that ACR handles TIF files with no problem. I have shot TIF with a Nikon D2Xs for fun a few times and it seemed to work ok. It just seems bulky and not as flexible as RAW.

 

RAW and never look at them again. I've got a ton I've never bothered to edit because I just cant be arsed to go through them, in future I'll be shooting RAW+JPEG to pick out the ones I want easier but it takes them longer to dump to CF I know CS3 does it natively, and I should use Bridge more tbh.