[biz-engineer]

I used to shoot a lot in JPEG with the K3. With the K1, I've come to realize that the in-camera JPEG engine is fast but not that good. I'm able to lot better images, especially if I crop, when I process the RAWs externally. It's not only about sharpness, it's also about the noise after encoding to JPEG, the OOC JPEG from the K1 are noisy (result of simplification of the JPEG compression algorithm, I guess).

[Dericali]

My preference is RAW and post-production in Lightroom. It's amazing how much time you can save by saving your own editing presets and applying them to images. And being able to do mass changes.

Changes to colour profiles, removing purple fringing, lens correction... so easy on Lightroom

You can also create virtual copies and do multiple edits on the same image to compare the outcome... this is useful when converting to BW.

[Madaboutpix]

No way I'm giving up RAW plus light but effective post processing. The unprecedented extent of control and flexibility were among the things that finally convinced me of digital photography in the first place, not to mention the far superior results. If I wanted less sophistication and control, I would shoot with my phone, not with a flagship DSLR.

As far as computers are concerned, I've simply found Windows machines the best and most affordable compromise for juggling my work/photography/gaming needs (or interests, if you will). And I've also found that, with a little discipline and maintenance, these machines perform way better and more reliably than all the frustrated user reports out there would lead one to expect. That said, I know perfectly well that Windows can be a pain of epic proportions, and that not everyone will be willing to upgrade their PC every three to five years, like I've had the privilege to be able to.

[Rondec]

I think for snap shots jpegs are fine. The issue becomes when you want to maximize your dynamic range with landscape photos or bump shadows or even change white balance, you hit the wall when editing jpegs a lot quicker. I will sometimes shoot jpegs when on family trips -- I just come back with a thousand photos and other than deleting them, it does save time. But I find that even there I often want to do little adjustments and I end up doing something to about every photos whether or not I am shooting RAW.

That said, if I were more compulsive about framing and more deliberate about the photos I took, I could probably get by with a lot less post processing too.

[robgski]

If you try to get it right in camera, preferrably before you actuate the shutter, there is less post processing necessary. It is probably a habit developed from shooting film, and not having much money, but I would rather take the time to compose a good shot with the right settings that spend hours culling not quite right pix and then trying to improve some in post processing. I did not that I cropped a lot, which caused me to spend more time on composition, and getting closer to the subject.

I am not opposed to shooting jpg, for years that was my only option, and I managedd to do well enough to win contests. Most people are not pixel peepers, so will notice one format over another. There are times when I prefer RAW, low light or night shooting, for example, but even then I have had some very good results using only jpg

[ThorSanchez]

I've never even figured out how to tweak the jpg settings in my K-30 or K-3ii. I've always shot RAW. Maybe I could and still get acceptable results, but lots and lots of my favorites just wouldn't be that good without the ability to manipulate RAW. I'm sure better skill on my part would help, but I've rescued many an ill-exposed shot with RAW and ended up with something I really liked.

One fairly recent example here. Straight out of camera the distant ridges were over exposed, it was hazy, washed out. Was that my fault? Maybe, probably. I doubt that could be recovered with jpg. In any case, I'd probably end up with 20, 30, 50% less keepers if I only shot jpg.

(Of course the other side of RAW... looking at the final photo here I'm thinking I could go back tweak some more and make it better.)

[GlennG]

wade in and give your 2 cents to my Sunday brain drivel.

2 cents for sure here. I shoot only in jpeg and probably give up a lot of potential goodness in the final photos, though I'm still mostly happy with the results. Quite often what I shoot are the high school proms and other formals, and both the kids and parents seem to want photos uploaded immediately. This is not paid, of course. Both the kids and quite a few parents seem to like my photos for the most part. The kids look great, but my ability to capture is likely in the broad average range. After the shooting event I just eliminate the obvious delete photos and create a sharable Flickr album, and then send a link for that. Almost no PP, but I might crop a bit, lighten, and sharpen a bit, but not much more as it would take time. I am actually somewhat jealous of the Raw shooters, but that is another discussion.

[savoche]

It's amazing how much time you can save by saving your own editing presets and applying them to images.

You can also make Lightroom apply presets automatically on import. Not only that, but you can make separate presets for each combination of camera and ISO if you wish (K-3 ISO100: presetA; K-3 ISO200: presetB; K-5 ISO100: presetC etc). It does take some effort to set up at first, but after that you will have all your basic edits done before you even look at the images for the first time.

If anyone's interested I made a short how-to in a thread over here

Edit:
Oh, and the clostest I have come to shooting JPEG only was the first month after I got my Ricoh GR. I shot RAW+ and mostly used the JPEGs (and for the rest I did the RAW editing all in-camera) and my goal was to learn everything there was to learn about the camera. It was a great experience. I should probably do the same with the K-1 just to force myself to dig into all the options I never look at when shooting RAW only.

[automorphism]

If you are actually considering Linux, I'd say go for a dual-boot environment so you can keep Windows for games. I suggest Linux Mint. I've got it installed on a MacBook Pro right now, and it just worked right out of the box.

It might take a little getting used to, but once you do, it stays out of your way totally, far more so than OS X or Windows. You can also then check out darktable for editing.

[clackers]

I shoot in RAW+, but do go to JPG only for some action shots to get a faster frame rate.

[robgski]

Savoche makes a good point, using RAW only limits a lot of of the in-camera features available.

[BruceBanner]

You can also make Lightroom apply presets automatically on import. Not only that, but you can make separate presets for each combination of camera and ISO if you wish (K-3 ISO100: presetA; K-3 ISO200: presetB; K-5 ISO100: presetC etc). It does take some effort to set up at first, but after that you will have all your basic edits done before you even look at the images for the first time.

If anyone's interested I made a short how-to in a thread over here

Edit:
Oh, and the clostest I have come to shooting JPEG only was the first month after I got my Ricoh GR. I shot RAW+ and mostly used the JPEGs (and for the rest I did the RAW editing all in-camera) and my goal was to learn everything there was to learn about the camera. It was a great experience. I should probably do the same with the K-1 just to force myself to dig into all the options I never look at when shooting RAW only.

Thanks, I will check that out.

The only time i really used presets in LR was for one specific day/time of shooting, so that i could get all those shots from that time period to have a similar feel/warmth (such as a cross country shoot or something).
I figured it would not be possible to really have a list of generic presets applied to all kinda shooting conditions, but I'm prolly wrong about that, when time allows I will definitely check out your links.

It was just a thought that stemmed from the fact my windows machine 'broke' and I was contemplating my next tech move, I thought "do i really need to do a massive amount of PP like I currently do?". I mean I take the RAW file, play with shadows, highlights, vibrancy and clarity, punch it a bit more or pullback, and then export as Jpg... well guess what... a lot of those options are already available in Camera! 5 User modes, I could set each on to having very different 'feels' about the shot, a Monochrome mode, desaturated mode, vibrant mode, woman portrait (softer clarity) etc etc. It might save a huge a amount of time after the shots are taken...
The other benefit is buffering issues, shooting Jpg and doing something like the Brenizer method I have found is really only possible in Jpg mode, i encounter buffering when aattempting to fire off 20-30shots in quick succession.
I'm also just wondering how much leeway I lose if I absolutely have to edit a Jpg vs a RAW, it's not something I have had experience in, messing around with highlights and shadows in Jpg files etc.

However, i already have my 5 user modes configured to a high degree on both the k-1 and kp, i wish pentax allowed for an export and import of user mode presets, that way I could safely take off what I am currently using and trial a month or two with this jpg only idea, and if no go can easily revert back. As it is it seems I'm going to have to build a spreadsheet and input each and every mod I have made to the 5 User Presets (something I have actually brought up in the past and thought about doing and sharing with the community here).

Good feedback everyone!

[BigMackCam]

The only time i really used presets in LR was for one specific day/time of shooting, so that i could get all those shots from that time period to have a similar feel/warmth (such as a cross country shoot or something).
I figured it would not be possible to really have a list of generic presets applied to all kinda shooting conditions, but I'm prolly wrong about that,

Bruce, just on that point...

In Lightroom, all I now do is get the exposure, shadows, highlights, white and black points set as I want them. The rest of my tweaks are handled by my own presets. It usually takes me under a minute to have a RAW photo ready for export to JPEG. Occasionally it will take longer if I'm doing more in-depth work on the image, but not often. User presets are very definitely worth looking into

[BruceBanner]

Bruce, just on that point...

In Lightroom, all I now do is get the exposure, shadows, highlights, white and black points set as I want them. The rest of my tweaks are handled by my own presets. It usually takes me under a minute to have a RAW photo ready for export to JPEG. Occasionally it will take longer if I'm doing more in-depth work on the image, but not often. User presets are very definitely worth looking into

Yeh I will definitely look into Presets more seriously. Like i said I have used them in the past, or... also the Sync mode when trying to get the same feel of a certain bunch of shots taken in a similar environment, but i figured presets would fall apart from an overal 'blanket' kinda perspective but i'm prolly wrong about that.
My editing too can be as quick as 1min, done. Other times I like to visit a Topaz plugin such as Black&White (which I think it does a better job, especially with Topaz's Adaptive Exposure, sometimes I use that plugin via Photoshop as well, so that I can apply a mask and punch out that particular area of the scene, so all those plugins take time to fire up etc, it all adds to the editing process and how far you wanna go.
I bet some machines are just better and faster at editing than others as well, editing is a broad term, there's editing and then there's editing...

[savoche]

I figured it would not be possible to really have a list of generic presets applied to all kinda shooting conditions

That is correct, it's not possible. But what I do for pretty much every picture I import is:
- Pull down the higlights (usually less for high-ISO images due to the reduced DR)
- Lift the shadow
- Pull up the whites and down the blacks a bit (i.e. increase contrast a bit)
- Add a bit of sharpening, but with a mask to avoid sharpening noise (say a mask of 60 for low ISO increasing to close to 100 as the ISO increases)
- Add a tad of noise reduction - of course more the higher the ISO
- Change the Camera Profile from Adobe Standard to Embedded - I usually prefer the slightly warmer colours of the embedded profile

That saves me from quite a lot of steps for most images.

do i really need to do a massive amount of PP like I currently do?

I think the answer will be "Do whatever works for you" - we all have different views on what's good enough and how much work is too much. I enjoy post processing, other's can't stand it.

I'm also just wondering how much leeway I lose if I absolutely have to edit a Jpg vs a RAW, it's not something I have had experience in, messing around with highlights and shadows in Jpg files etc.

You lose quite a lot. If you want to shoot JPEG only you definitely need to get it close to perfect in the camera. I would strongly recommend shooting RAW+ if you suspect you might want to do more than a fine polish of your images in PP. Then you can use the JPEGs straight if they're good enough, but still have the option of doing more if you think the shot needs it and deserves it.

i wish pentax allowed for an export and import of user mode presets, that way I could safely take off what I am currently using

That would be really neat. The little Ricoh GR has three user modes and six "storage slots". I pretty much never change the two first and then choose the third one from my "library" of presets as needed. If they could do it on the GR they can do it on the KP/K-1