Why should you shoot in RAW format?

The letters “RAW” are not an acronym and do not represent a file extension name. In fact, there is no standard file extension for RAW files. Instead, each camera manufacturer uses its own proprietary extension. For example, Canon uses .CR2, Nikon uses .NEF, Sony uses .ARW., and so on. When we say `RAW` we are referring to a file format that contains unprocessed image data from a digital camera’s sensor saved non-destructively on camera’s memory without having any makeovers or changes to the file, which is why they’re referred to as ‘raw’.

I very rarely shot in RAW as my images were usually printed as 1 or 2 column shots in newspapers and magazines. RAW images are memory hogs and slower to process. At the daily paper, I had 5 deadlines a day to meet, so JPEGs were the way to go. When the digital age began, I frequently needed to reduce the size of my JPEG files so they would load faster on a website.

I compare a RAW file and a jpeg files. A Raw file is a pristine Case that has locks, solid sides and is waterproof. A jpeg is a paper bag. Both work to hold something, but What you put in the case comes out after a year exactly as you left it. The stuff you put in a paper bag has been squashed and bruised.

A Masters control over the full potential of a correctly exposed image that will allow for professional editing, with artistic and creative capabilities. Latitude is the key to great reproduction and printing.

The main reason for shooting RAW is the range of correction you get in post production. However, you should never rely on that and still aim to get the correct exposure in camera. The same as a film camera. Remember, even with film you could lift shadows and reduce highlights as long as it was shot almost right. I shoot RAW for weddings as sometimes shooting at pace light changes fast so having the buffer of a RAW files is great. For some shows I shoot jpeg as the light is the same all day and I'm taking 3000-6000 images and want to keep file sizes a little lower. Commercial work is always shot in RAW too.

Shooting in RAW format provides greater creative processing flexibility compared to JPEG. RAW files allow you to make decisions on how the image will look during post-processing, unlike JPEG files that are processed by the camera and cannot be undone. With software like Lightroom, changes made to RAW files can be modified at any time, offering maximum creative flexibility. RAW shooting also enables the improvement of less-than-ideal exposures. Overall, shooting in RAW offers the main benefits of enhanced creative control and the ability to optimise image quality during post-processing.

Additionally, the benefit of the newer AI-powered noise reduction tool in Adobe Lightroom can not be overstated. You can drastically reduce noise and grain within your RAW image with just a single click. I now have no reservations about shooting at ISO 6,400+ in most cases.

If you're serious about photography, then you should consider shooting in RAW. It will give you more control over your images and allow you to produce better results. When you edit a RAW file, you are essentially creating a set of instructions for how the file should be processed. These instructions are stored in a separate file, called a sidecar file. The original RAW file is not altered in any way, so you can always go back to it. This is called non-destructive editing, and it is one of the biggest advantages of shooting in RAW. JPG files, on the other hand, are compressed files with some of the image data already lost when the file is processed and saved by camera onto its memory, not to mention loss during editing.

RAW images let me adjust everything except ISO, aperture, and shutter speed. If I accidently change any other presets, I can change them in editing. It also gives me much better quality images after editing.

The main limitations of shooting in RAW format are file size, editing time, and reliance on editing. RAW files are typically two to six times as large as JPEG, which can add up to a lot of extra spending on storage in the long term. RAW files also can’t be used in their raw format and must be converted in editing software before they are usable as ordinary images. This increases the barriers between you and your images by increasing editing time and the additional cost of editing software. Shooting RAW can also end up creating a reliance on the editing process. Shooting in another format like JPEG forces you to become a better photographer by improving your ability to get the correct exposure in the camera.

While shooting in RAW format offers a lot of benefits, such as better image quality and more control during post-processing, it does come with some drawbacks. Here are a few: - File Size - Processing Time -Compatibility Issues - Limited In-camera Processing - Slower Camera Performance Despite these drawbacks, I prefer shooting in RAW because of the greater flexibility and higher quality it offers, particularly for important shoots or situations with challenging lighting. However, for everyday photography or situations where you need to shoot quickly and share images immediately, JPEG might be more convenient.

I wish I had started shooting in RAW immediately. Now I shoot with files in both RAW and JPG being saved. My camera presets are saved in both files giving me instant access to a decent picture. Days, months, or years later I process the RAW image. I admit I need a few extra memory cards while shooting and a few extra hard drives to store and backup images. Having entered digital photography in 2002, my choices of camera, tablet, phone, cloud computing and computer included my photography needs. I prefer not to use cloud storage as my primary method.

The only drawback to shooting in RAW is that you are adding an extra step to your workflow. There are huge advantages in being able to edit photos, and I advise everybody to do a little editing on every photo that they publish, but if you're just taking snaps, or record shots, then a JPEG is quicker and more convenient.

90% of the time I shoot RAW, but there is a time and place for JPEG. Just make sure you know why you picked one or the other. JPEG photos are much smaller files meaning they transfer to your computer faster, they import into your editing software faster, and they write to your SD card faster. Your camera's temporary buffer probably won't ever fill up when shooting JPEGs. If you shoot JPEG you should already be planning on doing minimal editing to your photos so before the shoot starts, take the time to nail down your white balance and exposure. If your shoot requires you to deliver a high volume of photos in a very short time frame, for example, photos of the runners in a race that need to be uploaded ASAP, maybe shoot JPEG.

On many cameras nowadays you'll also find a compressed RAW option. JPEGS are pretty much really compressed RAW files. The "compressed RAW" (it's called C RAW on Canon, not sure what the others call it) is a slightly compressed file. It has slightly less info and thus a slightly smaller files size than a true RAW file but not to the extent of JPEGs.

RAW files, in most cases, can be 2 to 6 times larger in file size than JPEG or PNG files, but they offer a number of advantages. First, they capture a wider range of tonal and colour information than compressed formats. This means that you have more flexibility when editing your photos in post-processing. Second, RAW files allow you to adjust the white balance, exposure, and other settings AFTER the photo has been taken. Yes that’s right! This can be helpful in many ways, especially when light is not consistent.

I found that Lightroom 6 meets all my needs for editing photos. Starting out with a black and white darkroom, I find Lightroom to be very friendly. I keep each new revision of images created. NIK offers some great tools for refining images but you lose the ability to tweek the camera sensor data after going through this step.

In image editing, the remarkable difference between RAW and JPEG is the control one gets over image's white balance, exposure, and colour balance. With a JPEG, these attributes are fixed and limited to the adjustments that were made by the camera when the image was captured. With a RAW image, a RAW editor is used to adjust the white balance to get that perfect colour adjustment. This is handy in many situations, especially if shot was taken in mixed lighting conditions. Similarly, for RAW shots taken in low-light conditions, one can use RAW editor to adjust the exposure to get perfect brightness and contrast. Finally, with a RAW editor, one can adjust the colours to get the perfect look for our image that was shot in RAW format.

If you are a professional, you need to take advantage of RAW file format, since it offers the most data for a file. Even the iPhone offers RAW as an option, which gives the most flexibility in post. I don’t think there is an argument to not use RAW unless you constrained by the requirements of the job, like a news photographer or an event photographer where the client wants images straight out of camera with no adjustments.

While RAW shooting is a great option for many different situations. I also believe that shooting in JPG can be beneficial once you have mastered the setting within your camera. I have shot many sporting events in JPG in a case where the coordinator wants the photos as fast as possible. The re is much less editing going on but the option to fix the photos if you mess up is far less.

RAW has lots of advantages for the photographer with time on their hands BUT there are at least two situations in which JPG might be a better bet. One is when shooting events for sale of images on site. When images need to go straight to viewing screens for immediate sale then you should shoot JPG. Likewise when you are shooting editorial and wiring images live to a picture desk as fast as possible then they won’t want to edit a RAW file. Get it right in camera!