DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

To each his own. When I rarely shoot JPG I feel like I have made a snapshot and not a professional image.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

I shoot only raw. I've done tests on the capability of post adjustment with identical jpg and raw images, and there is no comparison. Also no worries about white balance. The bottom line is that if you can't tell the difference and don't think you'll ever need to, then you don't need to shoot raw.

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

If your happy with the results you get that is all that matters.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

True. I shoot raw - just because. As you've no doubt read, raw always requires processing, especially to color and focus. JPEG can produce excellent results if you have correct lighting and exposure.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I'm the same, but I think it's more psychological than actual. I'm not sure many of my results are professional quality, anyway. Fortunately, I don't rely on photography to pay the bills.

StanRP Loc: Ontario Canada

In the last few weeks I have read numerous article on Raw versus JPG. Then I took hundreds of pictures in both formats.I knew enthusiasts swear by RAW but I reached a conclusion. For the average amateur JPG Fine is what they should shoot
I can get more on my memory card as Raw does use a lot of space.

****************

Hi,

The reason "enthusiasts swear by RAW" is that JPG are 8 bit files while RAW is 14,16 or more bits.

If the original photo is good, then the JPG from the camera is all one needs. The RAW file has more information at both the light and dark ends of the scale so that in many cases, a blown highlight, such as the sky, can be recovered as can something lost in the shadows.
With RAW it is simple to correct 'White Balance'. In any editing there is more information in the RAW file and this will give a clearer and sharper final image.

For those who prefer to use JPG - when editing a JPG file, due to working with a compressed image, there is always a loss of information - and more JPG artifacts are added as the new JPG is created. This is why it is wise to keep the original JPG from the camera and edit a copy so that if your initial editing is not what you want, you can start again with the original.

Another point to consider, the camera can be set to create Basic, Normal or Fine JPG files. This is how the file is compressed, NOT the number of bits. For the best photo's use the FINE setting.

Personally, I take both JPG 'fine' and RAW '16 bit' so that I have the choice.

StanRP

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

All my cameras are set to jpg fine.

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

Balogna.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

This is the REAL reason people shoot RAW !

- and because it has been rammed down their throat by every web site/blog, magazine and book articles so these people can have a job and make money ......and the hardware/software/memory manufacturers can sell more.....

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

LOL

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Raw vs JPEG is like Mac vs. Windows or any yin vs. yang you can imagine... some folks are fanatics about one or the other.

The truth? They're both good tools. I use both, for VERY different reasons. Your conclusion is reasonable for many.

This thread will be great "click bait" for Google ads. It'll probably hit 10-12 pages!

catchlight.. Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway

If "Average" is where you set the bar then that is fine...a proclamation rationalizing a short cut or easier way to possess your work is your personal decision...

The UHH is a professional interaction and accessible to any skill level. Obviously your post is not targeted for any one with any processing knowledge or skill.

I think you would have been better off addressing the subject as an alternative rather than a replacement for the lesser skilled.

You seem to be advising a conclusion a bit early in the learning curve...

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Once again, Gene nails it. A few more points. At least for Canon, the appearance of the raw depends upon the image settings in the camera. Developing raw and jpg are absolutely the same except the former gives a lot more latitude and detail. You can save a severely underexposed raw but not a jpg. Gene says this in another way.

If you simply want pictures to email or upload, you will do just fine with a smart phone and save yourself a lot of money and back pain.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

I agree.