Unused RAW files - to keep or not to keep?

[oxfordy]

This year I have amassed over 60 GB of photo data. As well as being on my working hard drive, it is backed up onto two other hard drives - a total of 180 GB of RAW files. I collect so many because I mostly shoot bracketed, I shoot a lot of stitched panoramas, I'll try lots of angles positions etc. and work out later what I liked and didn't. I cull all the absolute rejects, but I am still left with heaps of RAW files that have not been used in any final work. I can carry on keeping them all and backing them up but I am wondering what others do and why? Am I being an obsessive magpie?

[RichardTaylor]

If it is family shots, and If it is shots for other people (like events or motor sport) I keep them, (but not similar duplicates)
My own personal stuff - I only keep the ones I have used.

[cbweyland]

Originally Posted by oxfordy

This year I have amassed over 60 GB of photo data. As well as being on my working hard drive, it is backed up onto two other hard drives - a total of 180 GB of RAW files. I collect so many because I mostly shoot bracketed, I shoot a lot of stitched panoramas, I'll try lots of angles positions etc. and work out later what I liked and didn't. I cull all the absolute rejects, but I am still left with heaps of RAW files that have not been used in any final work. I can carry on keeping them all and backing them up but I am wondering what others do and why? Am I being an obsessive magpie?

Unless it's your absolute best shots delete them and get on with your life! I did that and now my wife is going to kill me because I seem (also) to have lost all the photos I took while we traveled this summer!

Seriously: Keep the best only. 60 gigs is an absurd amount of data and the probability that you'll ever go back to look is small. Besides if you couldn't find use for them back when you took them, it's not likely that you will anytime in the future. And if you do, go out and shoot some new ones - that's a lot more fun...

[sybren]

Another important one: think more, shoot less. Learn how to get the exposure right so that you don't have to use bracketing. Remember what you liked in previous shots, and use that knowledge on your next shoot. Not only will you have less data to worry about, your photography will also improve.

[OsmosisStudios]

Unless it's a total gonner (OOF, motion, blur, etc), I keep my RAW files. Theyre always backed up on externals.

[oxfordy]

Originally Posted by sybren

Another important one: think more, shoot less. Learn how to get the exposure right so that you don't have to use bracketing. Remember what you liked in previous shots, and use that knowledge on your next shoot. Not only will you have less data to worry about, your photography will also improve.

I hear what you are saying but have to disagree - I was brought up on film and for years practised "get it right first time" - I can do this. But digital opens a new dimension - "keep your options open" or perhaps "deferred decision making". Even with film, I would spend a lot of time in the darkroom working up a final print from the raw shot. Now with digital I do the same only with more options - if I bracket then I can try an HDR or simply choose to use the under exposed or over exposed frame for a special effect. Why would I throw away those options? Also, freeing the mind from some of the technical details while shooting leaves it free to focus on the design aspects. For these reasons I make full use of the digital, near zero marginal cost, of letting the shutter fire multiple times.

This shot from the other day is a good example: fordy's photo blog : Balloon pilot. It was busy in the balloon that day and I had to shoot reactively and fast. I saw this composition and fired off a bracket. Only later did I decide upon the treatment and make use of the -1.5 EV frame.

[oxfordy]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Unless it's a total gonner (OOF, motion, blur, etc), I keep my RAW files. Theyre always backed up on externals.

Yes, that's pretty much where I am at too. I have gone back from time to time and done a new treatment on an older frame. I wouldn't like to loose that ability. That "Delete" key is just too darn final for me to want to press it - except on those bad frames that offend me!

[oxfordy]

Originally Posted by cbweyland

Unless it's your absolute best shots delete them and get on with your life! I did that and now my wife is going to kill me because I seem (also) to have lost all the photos I took while we traveled this summer!

Keep or die ... mmm; difficult that one ;-)

[tzimmerman]

Ok so my workflow will probably completely differ from most, but I do not keep archival copies of my RAW files. I shoot jpeg+raw, and have my own folder sorting system where I transfer the files. I go through the jpeg, cull shots, then open the other jpegs for editing. I never open the raw files for editing unless there is a problem I can better fix using raw (global white balance, over/under exposure, fill light etc). Anything I think I might want to tweak and edit later from the raw file I will keep those raws....the rest get dumped. Normally I end up with 15-20 JPEG files and 0-3 raw files when I am finished.

I got to this point through trial and error. For awhile I switched to only raw shooting, used lightroom to import tag edit yadda yadda, but to me it just seemed like extra work and I wasn't seeing results that were any better. Thats when I started shooting jpeg+raw, and comparing results. There was always a couple shots that I was happier with after fiddling with the raw files, enough that I didn't want to stop shooting raw.....but for the vast majority I couldn't tell much of any difference between the jpegs from camera and those after processing from raws. So in the end for me it just made more sense to juse jpeg 98% of the time and only use raw if there was something it would be better at fixing.

Now this workflow is for our personal photography hobby. We are starting to branch out doing side jobs and such, simple portraits and some engagement photos. For these shoots I am keeping the raw version of every keeper jpeg as well until a month or two after they order their prints. The only reason I do this is it comes down to the customer is always right, and they may want a photo altered in a way that the RAW file may be useful, unlike my own personal photos where when I am done with it, I know that is probly how I am going to want it in the future as well, so why take up all that extra space for raw files.

[oxfordy]

Originally Posted by tzimmerman

Ok so my workflow will probably completely differ from most, but I do not keep archival copies of my RAW files. I shoot jpeg+raw, and have my own folder sorting system where I transfer the files. ... I got to this point through trial and error. For awhile I switched to only raw shooting, used lightroom to import tag edit yadda yadda, but to me it just seemed like extra work and I wasn't seeing results that were any better. Thats when I started shooting jpeg+raw, and comparing results. There was always a couple shots that I was happier with after fiddling with the raw files, enough that I didn't want to stop shooting raw.....but for the vast majority I couldn't tell much of any difference between the jpegs from camera and those after processing from raws. So in the end for me it just made more sense to juse jpeg 98% of the time and only use raw if there was something it would be better at fixing. ...

That sounds like a reasonable approach given your choices. It highlights how different photographers are in their approach though. I too tried RAW+jpg for a while but got fed up with handling all the extra files. Because I use Capture NX2, editing RAW is as easy as editing JPG and the type of pictures I make lead me to push the boundaries a bit in post processing. So I work from RAW, print from processed RAW and produce final JPGs for viewing and web. JPGs are, for me, final output not raw material. If I look in a typical folder from a shoot, I might have 100 RAW files and maybe 10 final JPGs.