via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

Nice of you to input but the statement I made was directed to the OP who asked if it "was necessary" to shoot both. We all do things differently.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

What I dislike about this method is that I wind up with files with the same or similar names in both JPEG and NEF formats. Any images that I'm planning on processing get exported into JPEG format for sharing. The "extra" original JPEG version can get confused with the edited exports from LS/PR. Since I stopped saving the "extra" JPEG, I have never once found the need for one or regretted not being able to find it.

Because the quality is always better when you edit in RAW and export to JPEG, the SOOC JPEG is just a lower resolution version of exactly the same image as your RAW file. If you need to send unedited (or minimally edited) photos out to social media or via email quickly, I can see a use for the separate JPEG images. But if you're editing the RAW file (which, honestly, you probably should be doing if you're editing at all...), and exporting the edited file as a JPEG (whether or not you also save it as PSD, PNG, TIFF, or some other format), I just don't see why you'd need that original JPEG kicking around on your hard drive with a similar name to the one you've edited and improved.

The only other scenario where I can see a benefit is if you're not confident in your present abilities to edit RAW files, but think you may someday want to. In that case, why not learn the editing on RAW from the get go, especially with the wide array of easy to learn software available these days?

Andy

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Well, being a programmer for over 45 years, I have no problem keeping track of files. I don't use a catalogger either.

If I edit the RAW and create a new JPEG, I add "Adj" to the filename. Then I can see what the difference is in the changes I made. Sometimes I will simply replace the original JPEG. Depends what I feel like at the time. Leveling a shot the JPEG usually gets replaced. I've not been plagued by multiple JPEG files of the same shot.

And as I stated, I offer what "I" do. To each his own with what works best for them.
Some people need to learn the camera first. Then they get involved with an editor. Some do both at once.
As I posted in prior entries, I review the JPEGs in Windows Explorer, then if I want to modify it, I use the RAW editor. If I don't want to work on it, the JPEG is there to view again at a later time. I do not edit every image. I only edit when I want to print or post.
One cannot (shouldn't) speculate on someone's process by reading a line or three.
I always state what "I" do, if someone likes it, that's fine, if they do not, well that's fine also. I've offered an option.

Since everyone has a process that works best for them, I never say it's wrong. It's what they feel comfortable in accomplishing what they want to do. (Albeit sometimes I might be puzzled as to why they do something a particular way.) Finding out what works best for someone doesn't happen overnight. It's a trial and error to tweak the process the best way for themselves as each person's thought process is different.

Hope that helps.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Depends on your process. With some it is not necessary, with others it is.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Works for you, right?

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I shoot raw only. Except that my camera has a mode (Live View High Frame Rate) that will not output a raw file. So occasionally I will get a jpg. Since the final edits are stored as jpg, it presents the possibility of duplicate file names/formats. (That is a mode I do not use often but it happens).

Fortunately, I started using Downloader Pro to download and rename all my files and save them in folders with meaningful names. One option in DP is to save raw files to a /RAW/ subfolder and jpg files to a /JPG/ subfolder. So I have a named folder in which I save all my processed jpgs and one or two subfolders in which the raw files and the SOOC jpgs are stored (if jpgs are produced). The folder structure looks like this:

/2019/Suzie's Birthday/ (contains processed jpgs)
/2019/Suzie's Birthday/RAW/ (contains original raw files)
/2019/Suzie's Birthday/JPG/ (contains original jpg files)

So it's possible to get duplicate file names, but they are saved in different folders so there's no confusion (to me, anyway).

Obviously you don't have to use Downloader Pro to set up this folder structure, but if you use it the structure is set up automatically on download.

Another advantage of that folder structure is that when you want to back up the data, you just have to back up /2019/Suzie's Birthday/, and since the processed jpgs, the /RAW/ and the /JPG/ subfolders are all in that folder, everything is backed up in one operation.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I tried separating RAW and JPEG one time. It did not work for me. Too much of a pain to keep switching directories since I view JPEGs in Windows Explorer, then go edit the corresponding RAW.
As for backing up, I have all images in a PHOTOS directory in the root. All <subject>sub-directories get backed up when I backup PHOTOS. It also saves so much time instead of drilling down ..\users\<user>\MyDocuments\... or wherever they may be. I don't use a "downloader", I just copy new images to the appropriate new sub-directory.

blackest Loc: Ireland

One thing you might consider is exporting as a psp file to photoshop, and adding the psp file to lightrooms catalogue. This allows you to work on the same file in both programs, they can get a little bulky when layers are added but you can also turn on and off individual layers. It was gene put me on to this and i find it works pretty well. Thanks to Gene for teaching me this.

For the OP when you shoot a jpeg the camera adjusts a raw file according to the jpeg settings in place at the time in your camera. The raw file is presented to you without these adjustments so will initially not look so good.

Some cameras can develop a jpeg from a raw file in camera with the jpeg settings you choose when developing. Often the camera manufacturers computer software can also reproduce the camera's settings for jpeg too.
This gives pretty much every possibility available after the fact.

Later on you may be choosing shutter speed and Iso that are not ideal for an in camera jpeg but are better to produce a final image from a raw file.

It is likely that initially when processing raw , the camera may do a better job. Once you have a feel for the tools you should be doing better. Raw + jpeg may be good choice initially as you have a benchmark to beat.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Thanks. That explains the “why” of your workflow more clearly. To each their own; we all have different needs.

Andy

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Yes we (they) do.

User ID

My recommendation toward using large cards
emphasized the benefits of unused storage ...
such as maintaining write speed, etc. I prolly
don't put any more images on my 128s than
you put on your 16s or 32s. IOW I would NOT
lose 100GB of files IF a card fails. And I have
a possibly superstitious belief that keeping a
lot of unused space on cards wards off failure.
And I never swap cards when facing magnetic
north, nor during a new or full moon ;-)

YMMV !

.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Not necessary, but use a method/system that floats your boat. Shooting both floats mine.

marty wild Loc: England

If you don’t post process your images what’s the point in shooting Raw. Raw has many more pixels to work with. Which means you can do more to correct your image. I’m a member of EPS Society a few members bang on about get it right in the camera. Which I try to do! But it you are trying to capture the moment it’s click and go! Click and go! Where there’s only time too get near, but if you want to polish it you will need raw.

Fredrick Loc: Former NYC, now San Francisco Bay Area

You know, I personally just go back and forth about this. I first just shot in jpeg, then became a RAW convert ... but now that I switched to the Fuji system, I find it amazing what I can do with the jpeg images SOOC in post processing.

Now I only shoot in RAW if it’s a set of images I’m doing for a special purpose. It’s just so much simpler.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Geez Louise, the OP asked if it was NECESSARY to shoot both... Longshadow has said time and again on this thread that whatever process you like you should follow. Its your show; don't even depress the shutter if you like ! there are 11 letters in the alphabet between I and U which leaves a lot of room for differences of opinion. Lots of good advice regarding backups, redundancy etc... but ultimately its whatever you feel comfy doing. I save both and love sometimes going back to old images and giving then the old ACR treatment. Whats that old song " I did it my way ".