BillyDuds Loc: North Carolina

I started off with my d800 shooting jpegs while I got acquainted with the camera. Recently I switched to shooting raws to see if I could learn how to adjust photos in Photoshop CS6's Camera Raw.
Well, the d800 is way smarter than I am. My photos nearly always include family members, and the jpegs turn out beautifully exposed faces, even in backlit situations, indoors without flash, which I fail to approach using raw and Photoshop. I ascribe this to sophisticated algorithms in-camera. (I'm using matrix metering and active D lighting set to auto.)
(BTW, I've seen comments that active D lighting requires extra processing time in camera, so should be turned off when shooting maximal bursts. In my informal testing, there is no speed difference by ear with it on or off.)
I've concluded that I'll do best with the d800 to shoot jpegs (large, fine,) for people, and reserve raw for buildings, landscapes and similar subjects that don't include faces, and with which I may feel more freedom to play with the images than with those of family.
I'd like to present pics for comparison, but I don't post people photos on public media.
I look forward to criticisms and suggestions. Thanks!

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

Today's cameras all use the vast knowledge of many years and many photographers to come up with their software used in capturing and storing the photos.

I have not been convinced yet that I need to use anything other than JPG-Fine to get what I need. There are many other photographers, of the pro category as well as amatuer and beginner, that shoot only JPG because they get the settings right in camera and don't have to waste time processing the RAW files.

Don't ever feel you need to apologize for saving in JPG.

sloscheider Loc: Minnesota

I think there's a time and place for RAW but for most people Jpeg is perfectly fine. Especially if you're happy with the results. You can still adjust jpeg files too just not as effectively.

I would shoot RAW if you know there isn't enough light. You can deliberately under expose (a bit) to keep your shutter speed up if needed and then still get a decent image after adding a stop or two in pp.

I shoot RAW nearly all the time just because I don't want to have to think about it. Much of what I do I get paid for so color and white balance has to be right - when using a Color Checker Passport I can only apply the adjustments to RAW files.

I should add that working in LightRoom there is essentially no functional difference when working with a RAW file vs a Jpeg file so there's no additional time spent with one vs the other....

BillyDuds Loc: North Carolina

Many thanks to wahawk and sloscheider for your thoughtful and supportive replies. I was getting to think that if I wanted to really learn photography, I had to shoot only in raw. It's great to hear that experts use jpeg too!

Merry Christmas to you both, and to all the other UHH members.

mdorn Loc: Portland, OR

Well... I'm not an expert, but I'm also a JPEG shooter---well, not exactly. I shoot RAW+JPEG, then review the JPEGs. If there are any that I think warrant the fine control of post processing in raw, then I do spend the time. However, most of the time (99%) I just delete the raw after my review of the JPEGs. I also only archive JPEGs. I read somewhere that raw is like hoarding newspapers for 20 years---you think you might need the information someday, but you rarely if ever do. :-) For an amateur/hobbyist like me, that is indeed the case. Though, I can see why a professional would probably want to keep all the raw files.

elandel Loc: Milan, Italy

I also shoot jpeg and I'm pleased with my results. Often I use jpeg+raw to be sufe, but never really opened the raw files. What I do is spend some tine tuning the in-camera settings for jpeg untill I get what I want then use tjose settings.

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

I shoot JPEG, am satisfied. I view RAW as an artistic medium that I maybe play with some day. I also use the 800 and agree, Billy Duds, with your observations.

Also, I have stuck in my mind (haven't gotten around to researching - maye this first step) that I have read or heard that Nat Geo will only accept JPEG unprocessed images? Anybody confirm or refute?

jeryh Loc: Oxfordshire UK

cameras are pretty sophisticated these days, and really unless you like beating yourself on the head with a big stick, there is no need at all to use raw, despite what all the pundits say; JPEGS are fine for most uses, and people come to that. I use JPEGS for everything, including exhibition work- no complaints at all. If you want to tinker, and most of us seem to, try saving as a TIFF file, and you can play to your hearts content

gonate Loc: sacramento,calif

I use jpeg as well, I spend a extra moment and get my exposure correct,In getting my exposure correct and focus correct there is nothing more to expect. I dont have to spend hours correcting my photos. Thoes of you that want to shoot raw, thats fine.If you go out and shoot 1000 photos in a day, then your photos need to be corrected. many people have told me i am loosing quality by not shooting raw, I happen to think they are wrong.

BillyDuds Loc: North Carolina

Thanks to all for the further comments supporting jpeg. I like mdorn's idea of shooting both raw and jpeg, then discarding the raws once the jpegs turn out satisfactory. Think I'll try that. I'm trying to discipline myself to throw out most of the shots I take, saving only the best. Pretending that I'm shooting in the pre-digital era, if you see what I'm saying.

Back in the 1960s I took a road trip cross country and then to a summer job in the Yukon. I brought along six rolls of 36-frame color film, all I could afford at the time for the little camera my mom got me for Green Stamps. The farther I drove up along the Canadian Rockies and then across the Alaska Highway, the more spectacular the scenery got, and the more I regretted using up as much film as I had earlier in the trip. BTW, for anyone looking for beautiful landscapes to shoot, that's a great place to visit. Just go late in the summer; back then, there was still snow on the ground into June in the deep woods! And there are (at least there were then; ample campgrounds, so you can keep your costs under control. Gasoline was my major expense (subsisted on peanut butter and jelly sandwiches to keep the food costs down) with the most pricey I encountered in some remote spot on the Highway running 65 cents a gallon. Probably a tad more by now, I reckon.

I think Bboh and jeryh are right about the d800 and modern cameras in general becoming more and more sophisticated. Maybe raw will soon be (already is?) used predominantly for artistic expression.

Merry Christmas to all again!

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

oldtool2 Loc: South Jersey

You might want to spend a few minutes and read:

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-44050-1.html

It might explain when to shoot what and why.

Jim D

jdventer Loc: Wallingford, CT, USA

Sounds like you have made an informed decision. Only you can decide what works for you.

JonD Loc: Frisco, TX

This is intended to be a very friendly reply. Your D800 is among the most sophisticated cameras ever made. It is designed to capture raw data and will, when set to do so, efficiently make a jpeg copy reflecting the preset jpeg processsing choices set in-camera.

One uses raw files, especially the huge files of the D800, to postprocess in order to reveal the wealth of color, tonal, contrast, and other contributions in the raw file.

In the prior days of film, you could think of a negative as the equivalent of a raw file. If you took the negative to a drugstore, they would make prints according to a group of preset processing choices--the same for every shot and the same for everyone else's negatives--in order to produce nice snapshots. Analogous to today's jpegs.

Photographers wanting to produce prints with certain characteristics that differed from shot to shot would custom print from each negative--different enlarger settings, different chemical processes in the darkroom, and so on. Analogous to today's raw postprocessing.

The joy of photography is in image making. The question is whether you are ok with the general processing that outputs jpegs or do you want to go to another level figuring out how to manage raw files?

The fact that you bought a D800 tells me you want more out of your image making. Learning how to advance your skills is surely something to consider given the investment you've already made--and, it's great fun!

TheeGambler Loc: The green pastures of Northeast Texas

What format do you find that High-end, slick magazines want for photographs submitted.