[TVaudio]

For everyday photos it's SuperFine jpeg. But if I'm shooting anything I think is important or under difficult lighting conditions, it is RAW.

 

[socrates63]

I deal mostly with taking family snapshots so I work mainly with JPEG for the convenience and storage savings. I use a Canon 20D. I did do RAW for a little while, and I found it to be overkill for my needs.

 

[lan]

I use only RAW if given a choice. There are just more options.

 

[PsychoZX]

Jpeg unfortunately. My camera sucks.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

I shoot RAW currently, as it was one of the reasons I acquired my current camera (Fuji E900). It's as much about learning what can be done (before I step up to a DSLR) as it is preserving image quality. I really enjoy PP'ing now, and it's just a part of the whole photographic experience for me. Now on to pondering K100D vs. K10D and lenses

 

[Arainach]

I shoot RAW when I know my exposure is likely to not be perfect (i.e. challenging situations) and I don't have time to adjust. Other than that, I use JPEG, not to save space but because it cuts my postprocessing time by more than 50%.

 

[SK138]

My "vintage" Canon 1D shoots both. The file size is not that large and CF cards are relatively cheap...so I take advantage of shooting in both file formats. I ordered Apple's Aperture so it should be even better shooting in raw.

 

[dj_mocok]

I just tried shooting raw just now.
Well, it does indeed give you a heck more of flexibility.

I usually just post process my Jpeg with CS2, and it was the 1st time I tried to use raw, and it allowed me to adjust exposure, tint, etc... very easily.
Basically it's much easier to "fix" a picture if it is raw compared to when it's jpeg.

So basically I can just "perfect" the picture on that preview toolbar and save it as new. Very neat indeed.

But probably for my general portrait, I still use JPEG, since I don't do extensive PP on portrait works (and it allows me to view the thumbnails on my computer, whereas raw, it doesn't).
I'll probably just use the RAW option when I am doing my macro/still life works because it offers so much more and much easier to deal with compared to doing it from Jpeg.

 

[JeffS]

I'd shoot RAW if I had the option, but my current camera only shoots jpeg. My last one (Niknon CoolPix 950) could shoot TIFF, but since it was only 2 megapixel, and a bit slow by current standards, I had to upgrade. I'm hoping to step up to a DSLR in the next year at which point I'll make the jump to RAW only.
I have to admit though, that as far as quality goes jpeg with a good camera is still really good quality.

-Jeff

 

[Yen]

I shoot RAW with my Canon EOS Digital Rebel (300D), always. I have a 4G card, so I dont need to save space or anything most of the time. However, it fills the computer's HDD quite fast, so back-up DVDs must be made quite often and clean/delete the crappy shots.

 

[stevesurf]

This is pretty simple for most departments in my company, usually for marketing:
RAW + JPEG Basic. The JPEG is used just for a quick selection and then I process the RAW in CS2. The real reason I use RAW is because of the strength of the Adobe plug-in. No plug-in; no RAW. If I am running out of space on the four CF Cards I rotate, then I switch to JPEG fine. It really has not changed in the migration from D2H to D200.

FYI, DJ, Amazon has 4GB 133x Lexars for $125!

 

[beerguy0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjcha /img/forum/go_quote.gif I shoot RAW, mainly for the white balance adjustments. But I'm only beginning to explore the things you can do with RAW. One interesting thought is shooting with the camera on -1 exposure adjustment, then boosting the exposure in post processing to simulate a higher ISO shot (i.e., shooting ISO3200). I shoot a lot of ISO1600, so exploring this to allow me to do ISO3200 (my camera doesn't do this natively) is interesting. -Jason

You're wasting the range of your sensor this way, and will be guaranted to have noisier images. Shadows have inherently more noise in digital, since less information is recorded there. 1/2 the range of the sensor is in the 1st f-stop. By deliberately underexposing, you are literally throwing away 1/2 the range of your sensor.

The correct approach to shooting RAW is to expose to the right, but without blowing out the highlights. Read more here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...se-right.shtml

 

[stevesurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by beerguy0 /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're wasting the range of your sensor this way, and will be guaranted to have noisier images. Shadows have inherently more noise in digital

Yes, shadows do exhibit noise, but what works for one person's workflow does not for others. There may be a much higher priority on sensitivity and low light imaging (I know this also in my surveillance work). It is entirely possible to use plug-ins like Shadow Illuminator to enhance the shadow, followed by a noise reducer like Noise Ninja.

 

[Tyll Hertsens]

I have a Canon 10D and shoot raw. I do my PP in Capture One. For me PP on a .jpg is just no where near as good as the exposure/contrast/color balance control you have in raw.

 

[n_maher]

Completely depends on the subject matter and why I'm making the image. That said I'm an amature hack so it's pure blind luck if I get a decent looking image regardless.