Time for a Camera Corner question response…

@pwllem writes:

@CameraCorner what do you think? RAW, RAW + JPEG or High JPEG for weddings. My workflow is good with high jpeg but always looking…

Whether you should shoot RAW, Fine JPEG, or RAW+JPEG all depends on your final output.  Generally speaking, JPEG is the quicker, smaller file, and RAW is for fine tuning…  Here’s a quick rundown of when each format edges out the other.

JPEG is helpful for:

  1. Handing over digital files quickly. (Leave behind CDs or Memory Cards)
  2. Printing on the spot (PhotoBooth or SnapLab)
  3. Retail kiosk printing
  4. E-Mail Delivery
  5. Quick editing (Photoshop or GIMP)

RAW

  1. See EXACTLY what the camera saw
  2. More dynamic range (extra data in over & under exposed areas)
  3. Precise exposure and white balance correction (using editors such as LightRoom or Aperture)

Many purists will say working with JPEGs is like working with a scan of a print, and in one respect they are correct.  Much of the image file’s fidelity is lost when the camera converts to a JPEG, ESPECIALLY at the extreme edges of the histogram.  But if you value delivery speed over edit-ability (I just made that word up), I PERSONALLY don’t feel there is a compelling point to change how you do your job.  RAW processing software can be expensive, but every computer can read a JPEG natively.

That being said, if you have plenty of memory, why NOT shoot both RAW + JPEG?  Sure, your camera may take a split-second longer between exposures, but memory is cheap, and you’ve got an automatic backup and the best of both worlds right away.