Use of Raw and JPEG: For those with 2 card slots in their cameras what is the purpose of having one doing JPEG? I have found that if I want a backup I want it in raw as well. If I need...

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

For those with 2 card slots in their cameras what is the purpose of having one doing JPEG?
I have found that if I want a backup I want it in raw as well.
If I need to immediately send a photo out I just send it through to my phone and share it.
Otherwise if I am going to download it to my computer there is no rush and can take the time to do whatever PP I desire.
So what value is JPEG on the second card?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Architect1776 wrote:

For those with 2 card slots in their cameras what is the purpose of having one doing JPEG?
I have found that if I want a backup I want it in raw as well.
If I need to immediately send a photo out I just send it through to my phone and share it.
Otherwise if I am going to download it to my computer there is no rush and can take the time to do whatever PP I desire.
So what value is JPEG on the second card?

People like to separate and categorize.

There are two cards, so they put RAW on one and JPEG on the other.
Me, I put them all in the same place.That way I only have to upload one card....
(They all go in the same directory anyway.)

All my current cameras only have one slot, so If got a camera with two slots, of different media types, I'd only use one slot. I have 10 SD cards, I WON'T go buy 10 CF cards.

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

As an amateur photographer, I have never understood the need to shoot in JPEG

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

ken_stern wrote:

As an amateur photographer, I have never understood the need to shoot in JPEG

It's a personal preference.....

I save both because I peruse the shots in Explorer. Quick and dirty. Explorer is my "cataloger".
They are also easier to send to people, and I don't have a "driver" for RAW to be viewed in Explorer.
But I edit the RAW.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Architect1776 wrote:

So what value is JPEG on the second card?

For me none. I don't want them, I never save them and I don't care what they look like.

Iron Sight Loc: Utah

Sometimes for me its eaiser and quicker to view the JPG version while picking the ones you might
want to save for Raw post editing. Raw viewing sometimes takes a special viewer.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

ken_stern wrote:

As an amateur photographer, I have never understood the need to shoot in JPEG

I am an amateur and use the JPEG; that is the ‘need’ for it. I save the “raw” version only if I goofed and need to rescue the shot. In general, I am perfectly satisfied with what the Pentax processor gives me.

My Pentax KP has one slot, which is plenty for me.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Longshadow wrote:

People like to separate and categorize.

There are two cards, so they put RAW on one and JPEG on the other.
Me, I put them all in the same place.That way I only have to upload one card....
(They all go in the same directory anyway.)

All my current cameras only have one slot, so If got a camera with two slots, of different media types, I'd only use one slot. I have 10 SD cards, I WON'T go buy 10 CF cards.

Of what value is the SOC JPEG though?
Do you bother PP JPEG or only raw?
Then to save that raw you then have a 3rd folder of JPEG.
So again why even bother with a SOC JPEG taking up space?

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Iron Sight wrote:

Sometimes for me its eaiser and quicker to view the JPG version while picking the ones you might
want to save for Raw post editing.

Interesting as I can open and review raw just as quickly as a JPEG.
The ones I do not like are then deleted right there in the first pass through the raw photos.
Then in PP might decide others deserve to be deleted for some reason or other and they get trashed.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

rehess wrote:

I am an amateur and use the JPEG; that is the ‘need’ for it. I save the “raw” version only if I goofed and need to rescue the shot. In general, I am perfectly satisfied with what the Pentax processor gives me.

My Pentax KP has one slot, which is plenty for me.

That is OK. You have one slot and with my 7D I did the same and it worked well as it does for you. No complaint there.

But for those with a backup slot why waste it on a JPEG if it truly is a backup?
Would not a backup be best if it had all the data of the original vs a water downed copy of the original raw?
Over and over backup is pushed here and the need for a second slot and then the backup is wasted on a JPEG and not a true backup.

gwilliams6

Longshadow wrote:

It's a personal preference.....

I save both because I peruse the shots in Explorer. Quick and dirty. Explorer is my "cataloger".
They are also easier to send to people, and I don't have a "driver" for RAW to be viewed in Explorer.
But I edit the RAW.

Bill_de Loc: US

Every photo I have ever posted here is from a JPG.
When I shoot, I record Raw and JPG.

When I am going to print anything bigger than 6x8 I use raw.

It's not too unusual for folks here to commrnt on the images I post. They are 600 x 800 pixels including the small border. They get about a minutes worth of processing. My larger prints, up to 17x22, are printed at home and get attetion to detail.

As far as how much space is used, that stopped being an issue, for me, many, many years ago.

I don't own a cell phone, so all my photos come from a camera.

---

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Architect1776 wrote:

That is OK. You have one slot and with my 7D I did the same and it worked well as it does for you. No complaint there.

But for those with a backup slot why waste it on a JPEG if it truly is a backup?

My point is that - regardless of how many slots my camera has - the “raw” file is the backup, something to be used only if the JPEG can’t be used for some reason. For example, our cats are fascinated by the groundhog that sometimes strolls across our deck. Sometimes I use flash so to put as much light on them as is on the deck. I’ll work with the ‘raw’ file only if the flash doesn’t go off.

Orphoto Loc: Oregon

I shot 100s of uninteresting images trying to catch a few meteors. Easier to sort jpgs and then import the raw files with desireable content.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Orphoto wrote:

I shot 100s of uninteresting images trying to catch a few meteors. Easier to sort jpgs and then import the raw files with desireable content.

Why are JPEGs any easier to sort than raw?
I experience no difference thus quit wasting time on having both formats to start with.