Should I be Shooting in JPEG or RAW?

[Marko]

I just wanted to add how I work as the explanations for choosing 1 format over another are already well expressed in this thread.

I shoot RAW 100% of the time.

For family or snaps I add a small jpeg into each exposure (via a menu setting) so each shot has 1 full raw file and a small jpeg that I can process easily.

Hope that helps
Marko

[Mike Guilbault]

With my first digital SLR, Nikon D1, I shot mostly in jpg, only because I couldn't afford the hundreds of dollars for a memory card capable of holding the huge RAW files (after all, the D1 was a whopping 2.47 Megapixels!!!).

I'll add in here that I do shoot professionally, however, even for my personal work, now that I understand RAW's benefits, I shoot in it 100%. I hate going back to my old images now that were shot in jpg. They're not nearly as good and take far more time to process than a RAW file, especially in Lightroom. I find I can process RAW images faster now than I ever could a jpg file.

So, my answer to the original question would be to shoot in RAW. You never know when you'll capture that exceptional image that you need to take just a little further to make it outstanding.

This may help you decide too. You can liken a RAW file to shooting negative film. Much can be done to it in processing. Although with programs now like Lightroom that can perform many of the post-processing function on jpg and tif files, shooting jpg is more akin to shooting transparencies or slides. What you shoot (and what you have the camera calibrated for) is what you get. It's not as easy to process later as is the RAW image.

Hope that helps.

[JoeMezz]

Nikon D80 - What should I be shooting in? JPEG? RAW?

For the histogram i can get on my screen.. I googled it and it said it could be very worthwhile to keep it on the screen... should i? Should the colors be somewhere in the middle?

I would agree with Travis on this point.

I would shoot JPG to learn the camera and master your own skills. After that is substantially done I would shoot in RAW and then master post processing.

I would not agree with shooting RAW AND JPG .. what's the point? Nikon RAW files contain a JPG and when you open it with CaptureNX it applies your camera settings just like your camera would process it anyway.

Nikon RAW with CaptureNX is outstanding.

[Rikki]

I only really started shooting raw a year ago as disk space and flash memory came down in price.

I now shoot everything in raw, even fun stuff because you never know when that one image might be useful down the road.

Ive got a D700 now which outputs 15mb raw files, my previous cam the Fuji S3 had 25mb files but with 1tb drives available so cheap plus 32gb memory cards theres no reason not to.

[mindforge]

With the software in cameras today, you should always shoot raw - I can't think of any camera software that does not show the raw with your camera settings when you load it up, you can turn off the camera settings but it shows them, at least Nikon's, Canon's and Sony's does. The size difference is there but if you have a small memory card, perhaps that should be your next upgrade.

Even if you are a beginner I think you should shoot in RAW. Learn to weed out your bad shots to remove disc space. Many people argue about the keeping images thing but I think as a good photographer, you need to have an eye for the images that work and the ones that don't. I have a folder that I drag my junk to, once the folder hits 8 gig, I burn it. So, sure I still keep crappy images but they get wiped all the time.

If you are shooting with an early model camera with early software, shooting JPG might be an option, but only in this situation.