ltruex Loc: Waco TX

And the more times you delute (save an opened image) the worse the problem becomes...loosy artifacts. That is the way I remember the study, and it becomes my opinion only. I don't shoot JPEG and don't have the problem, and willing to accept what other prove is fact, but I will still shoot RAW.

dfalk Loc: Chugiak, Alaska

I wonder if that is true. You're not "saving" the image so there should be no additional data loss. Simply opening and closing a file shouldn't incur a data loss.

arphot Loc: Massachusetts

I believe it's not just opening and closing the image file but saving it over a number of times.

ltruex Loc: Waco TX

It's not data loss is pixilation...peper sprinkles...loosy data, for lack of better words.

lindysuewho

My second shooter at a recent wedding shot all raw and I loved editing them. I'm just not sure I could do it as first shooter where I am shooting 700 images for a wedding. Hmmmm. I REALLY liked it for the in church shots. Popped them into LightRoom and a few clicks and they were amazing.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

It's not pixelation. That comes from enlarging an image beyond its ideal range to the point where you see the pixels.
"JPEG Jaggies" are caused by compression of the file.
Over time (opening and RE-SAVING) it will degrade the image. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN JUST BY OPENING AND LOOKING AT IT in camera or on your computer, as long as you don't save it!

The effect may not be evident at first, especially it you are saving at a low compression setting (10-12) but it does eventually degrade.

Still, I shoot a a lot of events jpeg only, checking the histogram to make sure the exposure is where it should be.

The photo below is an extreme example, saving at a high compression several times. I don't remember where I found this great example- my apologies to the person who created it.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Should have added- when you save an edited JPEG file- save it as an uncompressed tiff or PSD file and you can edit it all you want without any compression artifacts.

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

Not quite true. It is only if you SAVE it. If you just open it and close it, there is no additional compression. You need a new instructor.

tkhphotography Loc: Gresham, Or, not Seattle

I like this better:

"raw" consider similar to film negatives

"jpeg" consider as color slides

one is 'processed', the other needs it

Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine

That is certainly true, but as I say, I don't know how cameras open/close files repeatedly, because I never do it.

Cheers,

R.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

To me raw is the only way to go. Also remember there is a JPEG inbedded in the RAW file there are programs like BreezeBrowser which allows you to extract the JPEG.Post Processing with Lightroom is fast and fairly easy and also allows use of plug-ins such as NIK

Fstop12 Loc: Kentucky

When shooting in JPEG mode you are pretty much letting your camera do the post processing of the image. Once click the button, the camera then goes into the internal software settings of the camera and uses those settings to process your shot. The settings could be many things depending on your camera. example: vivid setting, noise reduction, white balance, etc. What you get when the camera is finished is what I call a BAKED jpeg or the finished product. Kind of like the modern day version of a Polaroid camera except the camera shows you your finished product on the LCD instead of spitting it out in your hand. Yes you can post process this further in Photoshop but you don't as much information to work with. Now, let's switch over to RAW. When you take the shot, the camera uses your shutter, aperture, and ISO settings to record the scene. It also makes note of the white balance setting you have set and stores that information in the file. It also stores a jpeg file within the file. If I am correct, this stored jpeg file is what you are seeing on your LCD after the shot is taken. If you take RAW shots you will notice that they are kind of dull or flat compared to what you saw on the back of the LCD. This is because it really is the negative waiting to be Post processed. As mentioned by others in this post, once in post processing YOU will have the latitude to process the shot based on your taste AND, if you decide later that you want to TASTE something different you can always go back to your RAW(negative) and try something new. You really can't do that with a JPEG. I think as technology continues to improve at light speed, I want the ability to go back and use my original RAW shots with the newest post processing tools. I used to shoot only Jpeg and now I shoot mostly RAW. Sometimes I will shoot RAW & Jpeg together so that I have the ability to immediately fire off shot photos to my friends. When I am serious about my shots and know before hand what I want to do with it in post processing I will shoot only RAW.

Paulish

No, that will only happen if you *edit* and then save the image. Then yes, there wil be a lossy jpeg re-compression. But just displaying the image in your camera's viewfinder or screen will have no effect on the stored image.

Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine

Ah, that makes sense. But why would you edit it each time (or indeed any time) that you show someone?

Cheers,

R.

Dun1 Loc: Atlanta, GA

If you shoot raw images you not only as mentioned in previous post get to take control of the images in post processing, in most instances if you shot jpegs and the color balance is incorrect, or you set it wrong on your camera, you will not be able to correct the color balance.
Simply put a raw image give you an image you can capture on a clean pallet so to speak with each shot. It is the best image because it is not compressed as with jpegs, you get more information from you cameras sensor and are able to make more adjustments when you decide to process the images, each image is like a ball of clay so to speak and you with post processing have the ability to take that ball of clay and mold it to suit you likes