RAW + JPG, why both?

[jwampole]

Hello all. I hope this is the proper forum for my question. I'm shooting both RAW and JPG on my G10. Problem is I rarely use the JPG. PP the RAW file and save, usually as a TIF, but could just as easily save and/or as a JPG. I guess I see the camera JPG as a sort of backup. Would save some memory card space if I shot only RAW, with some decrease in camera processing time. I appreciate your thoughts or point me to a previous post on this subject. Thanks in advance and for reading my mail.

[stitchbug]

i was shooting both, and now only shoot raw. I never used the jpg, so why waste the space?

[dcclark]

I have heard of people who do this for two reasons:

1. The jpeg is a large-sized preview, so you can more easily preview your work without having to convert the raw file.
2. You want to work with the jpeg (because it's easier), but keep the raw around in case something really went wrong with the exposure, color balance, etc.

I also think it's a bit of a waste... but I only use jpeg except in very odd situations.

Why not? That's a better question.

[zarquon]

I see it as a good idea for a few reasons:

1. For someone just starting out in RAW, it's keeps you from getting overwhelmed with all that post processing, you can pick and choose a select few, but keep the JPEG versions for the rest.

2. For people who don't love post processing, it allows you to minimize what you need to do. If you get a JPEG preview of everything, you can go back to basics when you want to alter something.

3. Like maxharvard said, why not? Space is cheap, keep 2 versions and you can use the JPEG for quick distribution, and the raw for archiving.

[vsa]

I only shoot in RAW. Being just a hobbyist I don't have to send my photos to someone as fast as possible therefor I really don't need jpg. It's mostly matter of what's your workflow. If you get everything perfect in the camera then you don't need RAW. If you like to tinker with your photos and don't need to quickly process them for other people, you probably don't need the jpg.

That's my take on it at least.

[dakwegmo]

I shoot RAW+jpg basic. When I first started doing it, it was so I had a baseline of comparison when processing my RAW photos. Now, the only reason I continue is so I can quickly send snapshots to family and friends. I don't have to wait for them to process I can just email or upload them right away, and get around to processing the better ones on my own timeline.

[sybren]

There are several good reasons beyond just "why not?" or "I'm not sure about my PP skills".

Many professional cameras nowadays can shoot RAW onto one card, and JPEG onto the other. Pro's can then toss the JPEG card on the desk of their editor, who can quickly select the fotos (s)he likes. The photographer is then free to tweak the RAW files to get them perfect.

Another reason to shoot JPEG+RAW has to do with in-camera zooming. If you shoot in RAW only and zoom in, you zoom in on the embedded thumbnail. This thumbnail is usually smaller in resolution than a large (or even medium) sized JPEG. If you include a JPEG version of the shot, you'll zoom in on that one and have a better indication of the image sharpness.

Having said that, I only shoot in RAW. I have no editor to toss a card to, and writing the JPEG takes precious time. I'd rather spend that time shooting another frame!

[Doug Pardee]

The simple, and obvious answer, is: shoot Raw+JPEG if you want/need both the Raw and the JPEG.

Many people don't need both, some people do. The option is there for the people who do.

Myself, I shoot mainly JPEG. For photos that are particularly important or where the lighting is problematic, I'll shoot Raw+JPEG so that I'll have the Raw file in case I need it.

And vice versa: some people shoot Raw+JPEG because they're not yet completely comfortable with their personal Raw processing capabilities and want the JPEG as backup.

A number of Raw+JPEG shooters do so because they want/need immediate access to their photos without waiting to get to their computers—this would mainly be when away from home. This avoids problems like the guy who complained that he'd gone to a family reunion where the host had provided a photo printer… everyone was swapping prints except him, and he took some ribbing about his expensive camera that couldn't even produce a print.

In the end, it's just another tool that your camera provides. Use it if you want to, ignore it if you don't have a reason to use it.

[rediguana]

When I started the transition from JPEG to raw I started with raw+JPEG. It didn't take me long to discover that I was never using the JPEGs and just went straight to raw. Haven't taken a JPEG for ages now.