Disposition of RAW files
Oct 28, 2019 07:36:27 #
Currently shooting both JPEG (1 card) and RAW (1 card), and after review if the JPEG needs tweaking I make the adjustments using the RAW and then I replace the original JPEG. My question: at this point is there any reason for keeping the RAW file? My concern is storage space on my computer when you are keeping both files.
Oct 28, 2019 07:39:49 #
The RAW file is equivalent to a film negative. If one wants to re-work a photo without the negative, it becomes very difficult. Drive space is relatively inexpensive. Keep the RAW files.
--Bob
--Bob
Elmo55 wrote:
Currently shooting both JPEG (1 card) and RAW (1 card), and after review if the JPEG needs tweaking I make the adjustments using the RAW and then I replace the original JPEG. My question: at this point is there any reason for keeping the RAW file? My concern is storage space on my computer when you are keeping both files.
Oct 28, 2019 07:43:34 #
There's nothing wrong in shooting / editing Large & fine-quality JPEGs. Shooting RAW involves a commitment, a commitment of time, effort and infrastructure.
Everyone can approach RAW based on their individual needs. But if you don't have the storage, you should ask yourself why you are shooting RAW. You also should be aggressively culling your RAW images, keeping only what is the best, deleting the rest.
Your RAW file is available forever where your skills and / or software will change. I regularly revisit the edit of an image that was good, many times better than my ability to edit the image in years past. I can discard the old edit effort and restart on the file as if I'd shot it yesterday as those edits are stored external to the RAW file.
Everyone can approach RAW based on their individual needs. But if you don't have the storage, you should ask yourself why you are shooting RAW. You also should be aggressively culling your RAW images, keeping only what is the best, deleting the rest.
Your RAW file is available forever where your skills and / or software will change. I regularly revisit the edit of an image that was good, many times better than my ability to edit the image in years past. I can discard the old edit effort and restart on the file as if I'd shot it yesterday as those edits are stored external to the RAW file.
Oct 28, 2019 07:48:58 #
I’ve shot raw since there was such a thing, and have kept the files (I used Aperture and now use Lightroom so there was never any sense in keeping outputs that were JPG files.)
Years ago, I used DxO to process the NEF files; it was considered to be one of the best de-mosaicing packages available. Recently, just to experiment, I opened a few raw files from 6 or 7 years ago in LR to see how the newer program would handle those NEF files from my D200. I was astonished at how much better those old files’ images looked when processed in the newer LR program.
The point is that, in future, you might discover that the latest software does a better job on today’s files than current software does- so for anything important to me it’s well worth keeping raw files.
Storage is relatively cheap; IMHO it’s worth keeping raw files.
Years ago, I used DxO to process the NEF files; it was considered to be one of the best de-mosaicing packages available. Recently, just to experiment, I opened a few raw files from 6 or 7 years ago in LR to see how the newer program would handle those NEF files from my D200. I was astonished at how much better those old files’ images looked when processed in the newer LR program.
The point is that, in future, you might discover that the latest software does a better job on today’s files than current software does- so for anything important to me it’s well worth keeping raw files.
Storage is relatively cheap; IMHO it’s worth keeping raw files.
Oct 28, 2019 07:55:23 #
My first wife was an archivist. She beat into me "Always keep the original".
Keep the raw file. Technology changes. Your skills change, hopefully for the better. You might be able to improve that one of a kind photo you took last year.
These days there's no sense in skimping on memory. It's cheap. You don't have to keep the raw file on your primary disk, but keep it somewhere.
Keep the raw file. Technology changes. Your skills change, hopefully for the better. You might be able to improve that one of a kind photo you took last year.
These days there's no sense in skimping on memory. It's cheap. You don't have to keep the raw file on your primary disk, but keep it somewhere.
Oct 28, 2019 07:57:32 #
I don't keep many raw files, but I do keep some. I'm not a professional, so there really isn't much reason to keep any of them. Theoretically, I can go back and reprocess them when I get more skillful, or if I start using a different processing program. You're right about them taking up a lots of space. Regardless how hard drive prices have come down, raw files still take up a lot of space relative to everything else.
Oct 28, 2019 07:59:47 #
I keep the RAW files in case I want to do some other editing at a later date.
Oct 28, 2019 08:05:35 #
Oct 28, 2019 08:06:32 #
I keep RAW files because storage is so cheap and easy, there is no reason not to keep them.
Oct 28, 2019 08:10:12 #
johnst1001a
Loc: West Chester, Ohio
get an 8tb external drive, keep all raw files you want. photography is a hobby but now that i am retired i want to get into photo editing a lot more. i have thousands of great shotI never got to. So I am glad they are all raw.
Oct 28, 2019 08:14:25 #
Elmo55 wrote:
Currently shooting both JPEG (1 card) and RAW (1 card), and after review if the JPEG needs tweaking I make the adjustments using the RAW and then I replace the original JPEG. My question: at this point is there any reason for keeping the RAW file? My concern is storage space on my computer when you are keeping both files.
Do not get rid of your raw file. They are your negatives, so to speak...external hard drives for storage are cheap....if you are worried about storage space, then delete the jpeg after sharing or printing...
Think of it this way, raw equals negative; jpeg equals print....you can always make another printing you have the negative.....
Another point, if you are editing the raw and replacing the jpeg, then just shoot raw. Edit the ones you want to keep, and cull the bad ones.
I still have negatives from the film days stored....
Oct 28, 2019 08:56:05 #
I keep the RAW files because Adobe is always adding new functionality to PS and LR. I’m thinking that maybe in the future I can recover some detail in the RAW file with their software update that I can’t do today.
Oct 28, 2019 10:20:54 #
DirtFarmer wrote:
.Keep the raw file. Technology changes. Your skills change, hopefully for the better. You might be able to improve that one of a kind photo you took last year.
Oct 28, 2019 10:25:29 #
Oct 28, 2019 10:34:07 #
rmalarz wrote:
I love that repsonse.
--Bob
--Bob
Thanks! I worked a hard 5 seconds to google it!
Exhausted.
Must nap.
Dirt farmer hit the nail on the head. (Another google search?)
I’ve gone back and re-worked several of my old raw photos with new software and knowledge.
I may trash duplicate raw files, but keep at least one of any promising image.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.