RAW 99% of the time. One day I might get lucky and get an image that could be really good and I would kick myself for taking it in Jpeg
how about i swop my brownie box camara for your 5d
I shoot RAW only and save files after using Photoshop as TIFF.
I shoot raw 100%. I have a 5D and a 7D and I use Canon's DPP to process and it is fast. I shoot thousands of portrait images per year. Other than showing images immediately I see no reason to shoot in jpg. I never delete the original raw image. I would never want a jpg file to go back to, to re-work with it. Why compress then compress then compress, etc., etc., etc. Storage is to cheap to delete my raw files.
Although I have been shooting in BOTH formats simultaneously -- feasible on Nikon D7000 with dual card slots -- there is strong case for RAW only. That said, why would I not want to capture images in both. Permits me to have "quickie" version for e-mailing, while at same time provides an archival version one can go back to time and again for any desired fine-tuning.
Shoot only raw with my Nikons but usually have my Panasonic Lumix (jpg) handy for the snapshots.
I used to shoot both raw and fine jpeg, because I didn't have a means of "instantly" displaying Sony raw files on my computer, so that I could review them all and discard the rubbish.
However, I found that I almost never used the jpegs - I could always improve them. So, now that I can flick from one raw file to the next with the Picasa viewer, I shoot only raw.
If your camera takes really good jpegs, good luck to you....
It's an easy answer, snapshots - JPEG, photographs - RAW.
I am 100% RAW and proud of it.
I almost always shoot Raw and Jpeg. You may not see the difference between the 2 but Jpegs are edited by the camera and you may not agree with what the camera has done. Raw is raw, no editing of color etc. It is usually more true to what you see. I also shoot Raw most of the time because I may get a great shot that I want to edit and if it is only Jpeg, much can be lost.
I always shoot in the Raw format. No reason not to!
I shoot RAW only and have for years. I got a Nikon D600 this past week and am shooting in RAW + JPG because Adobe hasn't yet released camera raw for this model. I'll have to wait a week or two to see the RAW images, but can obviously see the JPGs immediately.
Yesterday was a bright sun/slight haze/blue sky day in Fargo and I was shooting fall foliage against the slightly hazy blue sky using a CPL. The JPGs really disappointed me - the sky is quite white. From past experience, I know that this will be much easier to fix in PS with the RAW files.
I don't shoot RAW because I need the extra information for editing every time, I shoot RAW because I don't know beforehand which shots will need that.
The only time I shoot jpg is when I'm shooting for an ad I'm going to place on eBay or Craigslist. So 99% of the time I shoot raw. If I shot for a professional sports publication that required the images right away I'd shoot jpg. If I shoot a party or gathering that is for my own use, I'll shoot in jpg. So far I've done no pro sports photography and haven't been to a party in years. On the other hand, if I do go to a party I'd probably just use my point and shoot.