[slip]

Don't get me wrong... great option to have, but what's its uses besides needing a photo in a hurry?
or do some of you use the Jpg as a "reference" to what the camera renders to compare your RAW interpretation?
I used this option for a while and now just convert the RAW to Jpg in photoshop and have the RAW as the original.
Any thoughts?

any comments much appreciated!

randy

[Finn]

I'd love to have raw + jpeg for exactly that reason -- to have a handy reference. I think of a jpeg as the Reader's Digest version, quick to look at and basically good but lacking the "substance" of a raw file. It would be nice to have a quick place I could look through hundreds of images relatively quickly.

[WMBP]

Randy, I'm glad you asked this question, as I have been wondering about this myself. I ASSUME (but have not tested and therefore do not actually know) that saving Raw + JPEG takes a little longer even than saving as Raw alone. And it takes up, what? about fifty-percent more space on the storage card?

Will

[jfdavis58]

More like 20-25% extra 'overhead'.

Guess not too many of you have shot for a nervous client. One who want's some proof that you got what's needed, but then still wants a finely tuned image a couple days later for actual use. Or in a situation where some of the subject will be departing almost immediately and they need a momento.

Try a couple months of event photography: awards ceremonies, retirement parties, grand openings. It's becoming more and more common for the parties to want a handfull of 4 by 6 prints immediately, then they order stuff retouched, copied, enlarged and even composited (two images or more combined to show something that may not have actually occurred).

As an individual, shooting for fun, I find JPEG plus RAW on demand (the opposite of what Randy requested info about) to be equally useful--not too hard to imagine how to use that, I think.

[slip]

More like 20-25% extra 'overhead'.

Guess not too many of you have shot for a nervous client. One who want's some proof that you got what's needed, but then still wants a finely tuned image a couple days later for actual use. Or in a situation where some of the subject will be departing almost immediately and they need a momento.

Try a couple months of event photography: awards ceremonies, retirement parties, grand openings. It's becoming more and more common for the parties to want a handfull of 4 by 6 prints immediately, then they order stuff retouched, copied, enlarged and even composited (two images or more combined to show something that may not have actually occurred).

As an individual, shooting for fun, I find JPEG plus RAW on demand (the opposite of what Randy requested info about) to be equally useful--not too hard to imagine how to use that, I think.

thanks, john, this makes a lot of sense!

I'd love to have raw + jpeg for exactly that reason -- to have a handy reference. I think of a jpeg as the Reader's Digest version, quick to look at and basically good but lacking the "substance" of a raw file. It would be nice to have a quick place I could look through hundreds of images relatively quickly.

I have been using Photoshop Elements 4 organizer with Photoshop CS2.... when I view the photo in the organizer, it gives me a jpg preview of the raw file (at least that is what I assume it does) so if I want I can use that as a "reference". or would the in camera jpg be different than jpg raw preview?

cheers

randy

[Cideway]

The main purpose is when you need to be able to show people what you have immediately, an then still have the RAWs for the main job, if i client wants to see all the images the day after the shoot, i can give them a CD of the JPEGS when shooting RAW+, and still have the RAWs to process when i need.

It came in handy when i was on holiday and the laptop i had, had no RAW converter so to view any of my images i had to shoot JPEG as well as RAW.

[WMBP]

The main purpose is when you need to be able to show people what you have immediately, an then still have the RAWs for the main job, if i client wants to see all the images the day after the shoot, i can give them a CD of the JPEGS when shooting RAW+, and still have the RAWs to process when i need.

It came in handy when i was on holiday and the laptop i had, had no RAW converter so to view any of my images i had to shoot JPEG as well as RAW.

Hmm. I guess that situation - no post-processing software handy - would justify shooting Raw + JPEG. But that seems like a somewhat unusual situation, at least a situation you could probably avoid by planning ahead.

What I'm trying to figure out is, why would I bother with Raw + JPEG when I can offload the image files (which I have to do anyway) and batch convert them to JPEG on my computer, in no more time than it would take me if I'd saved JPEGs in the camera? I mean, I can export 100 images from Lightroom as JPEGs and apply the same conversion settings to them, and it takes almost no time at all. I can't help thinking Raw+ is a hang over from the days where Raw conversion was a separate process and a distinct pain in the butt. Those days are gone for many of us - not so LONG gone, but gone.

Will

[-=JoN=-]

shoot the RAW+ option so I can give ppl a set right away prior to post processing. shooting an insane amount of photos takes time to go through, and sometimes friends, family, and myself want something i can post up online to show someone or just email them...etc, etc...

it's a great option...

[pentaxographer]

I shoot raw+ file format PEF in camera contrast and sharpness bumped up. Why JPEG because we are good photographers and the pictures are ready to print.
If I shoot jpeg only I can continuously shoot with no lag. If I shoot RAW I get lag after 10 or 11 shots and RAW+ I get lag after 6 or 7 shots. Some draw back but that many continuous shots are like movie mode. I never do it. I purchased some class 6 8GB SD cards so storage is not a problem. With the 3 8GB cards and 2 4GB I have 32 Gig

[volosong]

Being able to shot RAW+ has saved me hours, literally. Sure, you can batch process RAW files into JPEG files, but it either ties up the computer completely, or slows it down to the point where doing anything else that is CPU intensive is not feasible.

Don't think I can ever go back to RAW only. The minor inconvenience of RAW+ requiring more storage space is just that, a minor inconvenience.

By the way, I shoot DNG+. Haven't shot PEF after the first day with the K10D where I saw that PEF and DNG yielded the same images. Saves one more step, PEF to DNG conversion.

[carpents]

Being able to shot RAW+ has saved me hours, literally. Sure, you can batch process RAW files into JPEG files, but it either ties up the computer completely, or slows it down to the point where doing anything else that is CPU intensive is not feasible.

Don't think I can ever go back to RAW only. The minor inconvenience of RAW+ requiring more storage space is just that, a minor inconvenience.

By the way, I shoot DNG+. Haven't shot PEF after the first day with the K10D where I saw that PEF and DNG yielded the same images. Saves one more step, PEF to DNG conversion.

I switched to PEF (from DNG) after CS2 started supporting them because they're WAY smaller. It is simply more convenient on the cards - I can get about the same number of PEF files from the K10 as from the DS on the same card!

As to RAW+, I find it convenient sometimes when I don't want the overhead of the RAW file to just keep a JPG. So for quick snapshots that I'm never going to print I delete the PEF and keep the JPG.
I also used them while on vacation - downloading 2MP JPEGs to my friends laptop displayed much nicer (and quicker) than the 10MP ones.

[volosong]

I switched to PEF (from DNG) after CS2 started supporting them because they're WAY smaller. It is simply more convenient on the cards - I can get about the same number of PEF files from the K10 as from the DS on the same card!

Huh? I better go back and check. Only time I looked, the PEF files and DNG files were pretty close to the same size. About sixteen megs each. At the time, that was the one big complaint about Pentax DNG files...that they weren't compressed. Which firmware version are you running?

[carpents]

Huh? I better go back and check. Only time I looked, the PEF files and DNG files were pretty close to the same size. About sixteen megs each. At the time, that was the one big complaint about Pentax DNG files...that they weren't compressed. Which firmware version are you running?

I'm on 1.10. PEF are about 10 MB. Don't go by the # of images left on the counter - it strangely calculates space left based on uncompressed files even though the PEFs are compressed.

[Cideway]

I'm on 1.10. PEF are about 10 MB. Don't go by the # of images left on the counter - it strangely calculates space left based on uncompressed files even though the PEFs are compressed.

The compression of the PEF files was bought in at the last minute and the counter wasn't re-programmed to compensate for the smaller files.

[WMBP]

Being able to shot RAW+ has saved me hours, literally. Sure, you can batch process RAW files into JPEG files, but it either ties up the computer completely, or slows it down to the point where doing anything else that is CPU intensive is not feasible.

Hmmm. Not my experience. I get Adobe Lightroom started doing an import, then I go back to work in some other app. I would not ever want to be doing multiple tasks at the same time if several of them involved a lot of writing to the hard disk, but I don't do that: while Lightroom imports, I do email or something similarly benign. Not a big deal.

Don't think I can ever go back to RAW only. The minor inconvenience of RAW+ requiring more storage space is just that, a minor inconvenience.

I worry not just about the space, but also about the management of the files. Whenever you have duplicate files, you have to worry about which one is the "master" - the one you want to keep. Right now, I shoot Raw, and all my Raw images end up in the same area of my hard disk's folder hierarchy. Everything in there is a master or keeper. JPEGs are saved to a separate folder hierarchy and I know that everything in there is derived from a Raw master. When I'm processing the Raw shots, I do throw some away - but it's always a question of whether I want to keep the shot pure and simple. If I wanted to keep the shot but had to think about which VERSION of the file I wanted to keep, well, I know I'd sooner or later throw away the wrong file - or throw away both of them by accident.

Not saying this is not a solvable problem. I'm just glad not to have it. If I were to start shooting Raw+JPEG, I'd have to establish some new and careful rules about handling image files.

By the way, I shoot DNG+. Haven't shot PEF after the first day with the K10D where I saw that PEF and DNG yielded the same images. Saves one more step, PEF to DNG conversion.

I shoot PEF because the files are so much smaller than DNG. And I don't see the conversion step. Lightroom automatically converts files to DNG upon import. The process of conversion is invisible to me.

Will