Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I only shoot raw.
Delete all that are not wanted and as desired make a JPEG of those I want to share.
That way I don't have thousands of duplicates or near duplicates.
8 shots of a flower with a slight breeze and finally catch the dead calm between gusts.
7 get discarded. Same with all other shots, birds, buildings etc.

ncribble Loc: Albuquerque, NM

I like your approach and the reasoning, so just for the heck of it am going to give it a try.

Gracias,

pecohen Loc: Central Maine

I don't really think there is a right way or a wrong way on this issue. I only need the raw file so that is all I save. But if all you need is the JPEG file then that is what you should save. If you have a need for both and you can deal with the clutter that creates then that should control what you do.

elliott937 Loc: St. Louis

Until my very first dslr came out with a routine to read the RAW files on my Canon 20D (give some of you how long ago that was) I shot both, so that when Canon DID come out with a sub-system to read RAW files from my 20D, I could retrieve my RAW files. Once Canon did that, it was no longer necessary to show both. I would not recommend shooting both unless you really wanted to.
Bill

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I shoot both because I have two cards in my D7200 and can shoot both. Rarely use the JPEGs and thus don’t save them. Might use a few JPEGs if it’s just some shots at a routine social gathering like a birthday party.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

From the VERY BEGINNING of digital photography, raw was meant as the capture medium. JPEG was meant as a proofing and distribution medium.

Back then, dynamic range of sensors was limited. Processing power was anemic. Network bandwidth was pathetic or expensive, take your pick. And RAM and drive space were premium priced products.

The amateur market "went JPEG" to save time and money and provide instant images. Most folks didn't care about blown highlights, plugged shadows, inaccurate white balance, etc. They had low standards formed from decades of using consumer cameras and ultra contrasty Kodacolor film printed on Royal paper.

The pro market split. Some of us understood (from using transparency and slide films) how to deal with dynamic range in certain situations, by modifying light. We used fill flash and reflector boards in full sun, and multiple flash setups, flags, scrims, gobos, reflectors, diffusers... in the studio. We understood achieving correct white balance as analogous to using the color correction filters we had for slide films. We understood incident flash meter readings and how to keep the scene contrast ratio under 5:1 (2.5:1 or 3:1 for portraits). We understood how to tune the menu settings in our cameras to get the results WE wanted, rather than the camera company's default results.

We created whole pro workflows for things like mass market portraiture and parts catalog photography. When you take photos "on a production line," you "set it up, lock it down, rip the knobs off, and go to work." That was, and probably still is, school portraiture, church directory portraiture, big box store portraiture, etc.

On the other hand, raw capture won the hearts and minds of everyone who valued or needed control, latitude, and maximum creative potential recorded in their files.

Straddling the fence by saving JPEGs and raw together was a professional's approach created for those who needed IMMEDIATE copies of images for editing, proofing, "slide" show projection at weddings, or deadline publication. The JPEG could suffice for those uses, but the raw was available for serious editing and optimization for different uses (fine prints, newsprint, Internet, etc).

Saving JPEGs and raw together was an approach that worked for new photographers, also, to help them learn. It provided immediate feedback about light and composition and exposure, and allowed post-processing to be learned and performed as needed.

So I'm here to say that if you NEED JPEGs, and you NEED raw, capture both and boogie on. If you don't need the JPEGs from the camera for anything specific, just capture raw files and post-process to whatever file type or medium you intend to create. If you'll never care to benefit from raw, just record JPEGs. But do yourself a huge favor and learn what all those menu settings do! Your JPEGs will improve immensely if you understand what menu settings to use in different environments.

It's never JPEG vs raw. It's, "What do I need to do today?" Evaluate your situation and set your camera accordingly!

It's more important to save backups of raw files and any XMP files or Lightroom Catalogs than it is to save a JPEG from the camera. If you are not backing up your work on a regular basis, you WILL lose your data eventually.

cdayton

Gee, a new topic - how exciting.

Hiro Protaginast

I've always shot just raw. My needs never needed anything else. Wow, that's a jumbled sentence. A lot of people need jpegs for their work , but I don't so never shot them. The raw files can always be converted to jpegs if need be. If yours are just plain jpegs with no in camera effects applied to them I would just delete them.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

I’m guessing 24 pages that’s my story and I’m stickin to it!

NormanTheGr8 Loc: Racine, Wisconsin

I shoot both for family outings and events if I need to post asap to social media etc, otherwise RAW.
I only save the RAW files to the archives and for editing.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Except for some foods, I'm raw all the way. Why not? I like processing. I have some small old cameras that don't shoot raw, so I could use them for JPEG if I wanted to.

wcmoorejr Loc: Birmingham Alabama

This is the number 1 reason to shoot raw+jpg or jpg+jpg. I did a shoot this past weekend. I always switch out my CF card before I head back stage because the back stage shots have to be processed first. put my backup CF card in my 7DII and it failed. If I didnt have my camera set up write to both cards, I would have lost that section. When I got home, that 32GB CF card went straight to the trash. I would never trust it again. This is also the reason I wont buy a camera body that doesnt have 2 card slots.

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

I shot RAW & JPEG for a short time and then realized RAW wasn't required and now shoot JPEG almost entirely...so in my case I would keep them and dump the humongous RAW files. Cheers!

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

RAW is not really a new fad or whatever was being implied. But I am not discussing that here or now. I virtually always shoot just RAW only. I use Photoshop and never Lightroom. I find my 1T in PC C:-Drive adequate for my photography use. Once a year I archive my older images to external hard drives. I have a not all that new Windows 10 Dell Tower with 32 MB RAM. It might be time for you to get a new PC or MAC. There should be no problem with you deleting the camera made JPGs as long as you do it correctly and your Lr datatbase is based on the RAW files.

Hip Coyote

I’m going to watch Ground Hog Day for the tenth time tonight.