Has using RAW been a lie? Field TEST to understand the difference between JPEG and RAW.

[@20111111jorg]

I've edited JPG without a problem since digital came out. Just a few things to watch out for. Two of the biggest ones are don't re-edit the same file and generally shoot slightly underexposed. Archiving is also a problem with RAW. Standards change and not all are recognized. Besides, the most important thing is the subject matter, composition, ambiance etc. Most cameras also shoot faster with JPG so action shooting is not for RAW. Unless you're a pro, most people will be better off with JPG. I've had photos printed in several magazines and brochures, all have been JPG.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Brilliant, thank you for your comment, some great points raised there. 👍

[@ronpettitt6184]

Hi Ben. This is certainly an age old topic and it's always interesting to see the comments. I am a RAW shooter and always have been. For one thing, I can't see myself going into menus and adjusting settings to make my camera edit something differently. Many people don't understand that all those settings such as contrast, colour, etc are how your camera processes the jpg. If any of those are set too high, you can't simply dial them back in post. My main reason for shooting RAW is what you talked about, editing is where we make the photos our own. The edits are our vision for the scene and to me, that is as important as the actual capture. I would much rather do my tweaking in post after the fact than standing out in the field.

[@dippitydog9876]

I only shoot RAW if I'm not sure about the exposure. That way I have more control in post editing highlights and shadows. Other than that I use JPEG.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Ah okay, interesting point you raise there. RAW will certainly help when needed. 👍

[@d53101]

A few comments and questions. Ben what picture style JPG did you use? What file size JPG did you use? To fair, a neutral JPG I think should be used for this test. And the largest size JPG as well. For myself I shoot exclusively Canon Large Size, Fine Detail Picture Style JPG with all camera noise reduction turned off. Even within each picture style tweaks can be done. The actual JPG file size is determined by the complexity within the scene itself so you can’t make a blanket statement that JPGS will be half the size of a Raw file. A landscape image will be larger in file size than a bird in flight against a clear blue sky. I’ve seen myself JPGs of 25 or more meg JPGs from my Canon 90D with it’s 32 megapixel sensor. So for myself JPGs do the job quite nicely with a minimum amount of work.

[@dominiclester3232]

If you do this test again, maybe shoot "Raw+Jpeg" so that the clouds etc are identical? Have a look at "Nikon Picture Control Editor" (web-based) where we can make our own Presets and then select (after uploading) them in-camera! One big downside of Jpegs, for me, is that it's best to get the white balance perfect in camera and sometimes we just don't have time.

[@sarahwood2823]

Great vlog, as a non photographer it was hard to see the difference in so many of these. I think a good photo doesn't mind how it's shot :)

[@philingram9281]

G'day Ben, I have shot raw plus jpeg ever since I went digital, with Nikon's D800, D850 and now the Z9. The advantages of JPG are it's reduced file size, speed of uploading to client servers/sites and social media, and convenience especially when there is no, or minimal, need for post processing. Before covid I shot sports for local newspapers and needed to upload to their servers, so it was jpeg. I shoot models in studios and get it right in camera so require minimal editing, so jpegs are used. When I shoot birds and other wildlife for my own use, I will spend time editing just a couple of files so these I use raw. It basically comes down to horses for courses. To my way of thinking, there is no right or wrong answers in jpg vs raw as both are valid options that have their own advantages, disadvantages and purposes.

[@rayjenkins2754]

Agree !

[@TheDustyCamera-rg7wz]

Thanks for this video. My camera can shoot raw and jpeg simultaneously and I often choose to edit the jpeg. I find Raw seems to be better in low light or high contrasty conditions but jpeg is fine in good light. BTY I'm a complete nube so you can disregard if it's stupid!

[@nosherz]

I decided to shoot JPEG’s exclusively around 5 years ago after reaching the conclusion that for me personally, post processing RAW’s was rarely worth the additional time & effort. I take my photography seriously despite this, and found that by taking more care with exposure settings (and occasionally white balance if needed), plus some quick minor tweaks in post, I can pretty much achieve 99% of anything I could ever do in RAW for my style of photography, which is mainly street. When I used to shoot RAW I found whenever I ended up trying to extensively manipulate an image, I was usually trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear & the image was just a poor one to begin with.

[@ricknicholson5894]

1. Action shooters, BIF's, wildlife, journalists, aviation photographers and others who shoot action I left out, often prefer JPEG as shooting at high FPS's won't fill up your camera's buffer like RAW can. 2. Fuji shooters and others who have found that JPEG can be managed using film sims, sometimes even bracketing film sims styles such as three shots 1) Acros 2) Velvia 3) Kodachrome just from one shot. Many of us prefer in camera editing with an image good to go, much like using a smart or Iphone and producing an image good to go. Many of us don't want to be sitting at a computer editing.

[@JCW-e8e]

Ben. Just found your channel as Storm Isha rages outside in Penmaenmawr. Your style of presenting really appeals to me. Have started working back through your blogs - especially the ones local to me. Your enthusiasm and good humour shines like a beacon in the storm. Looking forward to continuing my trawl through your postings. Thanks and best wishes John Williams

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Thank you so much, hope you enjoy the videos, and helps pass the time through the storms. Thanks again and all the best.

[@rigbyphoto]

RAW definitely has the edge if you cock up the initial exposure or intentionally under-expose to protect the highlights and need help from software to recover shadows.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Absolutely, you can recover a lot more from RAW, it certainly has the edge. 👍

[@MikeHardisty]

In 2009 I was on a business trip to South Africa and had just bought my first digital camera, a Fuji S9600. On a day off I managed to spend a whole day taking photographs only to get back that night and realise that I had somehow set the WB to tungsten and JPEG. After that I always checked that I was shooting in RAW. This month we have a challenge in our local camera club SOOC. In effect, shoot JPEG, no cropping. no adjusting levels in Lightroom etc. To get some practice in I went to Talacre, it's only ten minutes drive away, breezy day, but the sun was out and some good clouds as well. Nowadays I shoot with an Olympus camera and the JPEG engine is reckoned to be quite good, but I still shot JPEG and RAW throughout the day. The results from the JPEG's was far better than I expected, so much so that for the next month or so I'm going to try and use only the JPEG's for anything I produce. I'll still shoot the RAW , though, just in case

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

What a shame mike that the imagine in south Africa didn’t turn out, I think we’ve all done similar and it’s so frustrating. It should be a good challenge though to shoot JPEG and uncropped, that really helps with reminding you to get it right in camera. Yeah I think RAW is the only way to go, it certainly helps with any mistakes that are made in camera, under or over exposed and it’s the profile I’ll be sticking to. Thanks Mike, all the best. 👍

[@jamescorton6288]

A question - did you try adjusting the contrast, brightness and saturation within each JPEG picture profile or use HDR to simulate exposure bracketing? I'm used to developing RAW but will use JPEG if it approximates to what I need without too much tweaking in PP. I find adjusting profiles helps.

[@philipfreeman6157]

Enjoyed your video, did you try different picture styles? I noticed you use a wireless remote on your d850, which one is it you use?

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

I use the neewer remote from Amazon, easy to use and fairly cheap too. Thank you so much 👍

[@stanokella]

Good video, with some of the pics you could see the RAW just had the edge, but only in the 100% crops. I started off just shooting jpeg, and moved to RAW after a couple of years as I didn’t have the software to process RAW at first. I always shoot RAW now, gives you a little more leeway if the exposure isn’t nailed in camera, especially the ability to set white balance in post and recover more from highlights and shadows. Also the no loss of information (in RAW) from editing and saving, a jpeg compresses on each modified save. Good stuff, Sir.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Thank you so much. Yeah it’s very close and only with the zoom it’s really noticeable, although some of the more difficult light jpeg struggles too. Thanks again and all the best. 👍

[@IanKnight40]

I find that when shooting in jpeg it is best for me to turn sharpening down to a low setting. This gives me the abilty to add sharpening in post if necessary. Cheers Ian.

[@kelvinwhite2901]

Hi Ben. First time on your channel and have been interested in what I've watched so far. I am pure armature who takes photos for my self or on holiday. I have set my camera to JPG + Raw /Tiff as this then gives me choices as to what I keep or edit.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Welcome Kelvin, hope you enjoy the rest of the videos. Hope this video helped. 👍

[@csc-photo]

I always shoot RAW to my primary card, and JPG to the secondary. Only reason (for my use case / preferences) to shoot JPG is 1 backup, and 2 for shoot & share situations. Higher volume family outings for example. But there's never an occasion, ever, where JPEG is the only image type I'm capturing. I have the best of both worlds with this approach. And, you never know when that next portfolio image will happen. The amount of useable image data a JPG image discards in the compression process GREATLY reduces overall quality and specifically editing leeway - colors, shadows, and highlights. And with modern RAW formats (Nikon's High Efficiency * for example), the file size differences aren't that far apart. JPG's are fine. RAW's are so much better. Capture both, discard what you don't need later 🙂

[@craigpiferphotography]

When I first starting shooting digital, I was shooting JPG a lot. This was partly because I didn't really know what to do with RAW files, and there were a number of photographers stating the JPG was just as good, easier, and quicker. After seeing a few competing theories in the RAW vs. JPG debate, I switch over wholly to RAW. I have the option, if I want it, to shoot RAW+JPG and get both files at the same time, however I've never done that. If your settings are dialed in correctly, then you'll have a beautiful JPG for sharing, printing, and more. If you don't get them dialed in quite right, RAW will shine. One cure for shooting JPG is to forget to change your WB setting (assuming you are using Auto) and shoot a whole set of photos with the wrong WB. Sure, you can still correct them somewhat, but it will never be quite the same. I did think that most of your JPGs looked a little crunchy compared to the RAW. There was just that much more in camera sharpening. Not necessarily a bad thing, but sometimes it's nice to be able to have a softer look. While I can be done somewhat with in camera profiles, that's a lot of work.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Thank you Craig, so great points made there, yeah making sure it’s correct when shoot JPG is on of the best tips to use, RAW is much more forgiving. But the white balance is critical, you’re so right. Thanks again mate and all the best. 👍

[@hedydd2]

I seldom have issues correcting white balance with jpeg. As long as there is a mid-grey area in the image with which to use the auto white balance dropper on. However I do shoot jpeg and raw in difficult mixed artificial light but usually use a custom white balance for the jpeg which avoids having to manipulate in post most of the time. In the very few that are ‘off’ and need adjusting in post, I try processing the jpg first which sorts 9 out of 10 but for that 1 in 10 then the raw gets processed, which allows just a bit more adjustment.

[@hedydd2]

It’s no work to reduce in-camera sharpening. It’s a menu item that usually only needs done once for each picture style or profile. Everything is adjustable to taste but really only needs perfecting once as long as the camera is not reset. If it is factory reset, then make sure that important camera photo settings are saved so they can be re-loaded off the SD or other memory card type used.

[@davidf6326]

Yes, but that still requires that you make an upfront decision on the level of sharpening and trust to a relatively tiny monitor on which to check it meets your needs. I honestly can't see any valid argument for shooting JPEG only.@@hedydd2

[@HadleyHope]

Shoot in RAW + JPG and as a Fuji user we can have so much fun with our film simulations.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Yeah I think most can, I know the Nikon I use has the option but I kept it separate for this process. I’ve yet to have a play with the option on it but I believe Fuji have some great ones. 👍

[@steveworthington930]

Btw Ben, an image from your viewpoint at Menai won the photo comp in Cheshire Life mag. It is a superb image. I will mail it you, are you at Stobart,s Barleycastle Depot?

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Hi Steve, no I'm based in Warrington but travel around to other Depots. Yeah it's an amazing location and so much more to be had.

[@steveworthington930]

Whats your office postcode please Ben. @@BenMcDonaldPhotography

[@rayjennings3637]

Every time I buy a new camera - and I'm picking up a new Pentax K-3 III tomorrow - I always tell myself that I'm going to shoot in RAW. However, after 2 or 3 months of interminable processing of those RAW images in 'Camera RAW' in Photoshop Elements I always revert back to JPG. I can still open a JPG image in Camera RAW and manipulate the Clarity and Vibrance etc. but because 2/3rds of the work is already done I need only do a few little tweaks and the post-processing is done in a fraction of the time.

[@steveworthington930]

Hi Ben, I now shoot Jpeg+Raw every time for the same image. Sometimes in cases of high dynamic range you need to manipulate the Raw file, however I find the Jpeg image acceptable 90% of the time. The processing engine in my Olympus camera get,s it right more often than not & colour rendition IMO is the best of any system.

[@the_rat_run]

I shoot both RAW & Jpg on my Sony cameras. Jpg is great for instant 'send to others' and RAW to experiment with. I've just bought a year of Adobe products - time to learn how to edit those RAW files with the hand-holding LRc gives (I have Darktable too, it is powerful, but doesn't hand-hold beginners! ) - even with a quick 'play' with LRc I'm seeing my RAW images starting to look more like how I saw them, Sony's colour science is good for JPG, yes, but not always great. Enjoyed your video, thanks, I've not visited Anglesea for over 20 years, maybe this year...

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Thank you so much, really appreciated.

[@NigelBaileyPhotography]

New to your channel - looks like we have a similar size following. I once managed to shoot half of a wedding in jpeg before realising it. Then switched to RAW. Fortunately, the jpeg files were in good light and no major mess-ups with exposure. However, had I done that in poor light or needed to correct or really push a shot in post, it would definitely have been a problem. I now do quite a lot of astro and light-painted nightscpes, where jpeg just wouldn’t cut it at all. But, for family days out and walks, casual holiday snaps and the like, jpeg generally fine; even so, I usually stick to RAW.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Thank you Nigel. That was lucky with the wedding shoot, yeah I think difficult light can cause more of an issue, but generally you’ll get away with it. I myself will continue to stick to RAW but I’m less afraid of JPEG after doing this. Although you’re completely right, I’m sure Astro and nightscapes need the RAW format. Thanks again and all the best. 👍

[@alangauld6079]

I think that was a great demo of why shoot in raw. I'd only use about 4 of the jpegs in that shoot the rest had some truly awful funky blue oversaturated skies with banding in at least one of them. Plus there were a couple had badly over sharpened edges and at least one had clear sharpening halos. I suspect your camera setting could be tweaked to improve the jpegs (tone down the blues and reduce sharpening for example) but really there was no comparison. And you didn't even push the processing hard, it would have been a different story if you'd tried to create a specific look to the images and repeated that for both raw and jpeg. The jpeg processing in camera is based on smoothing out the histogram and (depending on make/setytings) adding some contrast, sharpening and saturation. If that's all you do to your raws then you might as well shoot jpeg. But if you use many local adjustments then you really need raw.

[@dennisjones5126]

A good comparison video. The skies in Raw are spot on. But I don't like some of the skies in Jpeg.

[@jddawson8853]

Always shot RAW and manual.. 90% wildlife and of course the landscape your in when trying to find said wildlife. The only time I was concerened (stressed out) and decided I needed to capture both RAW and JPEG on the two cards on my 5DSr was when I did a friends wedding.. I ended up (difficult lighting conditions and the church wouldn't allow flash) using the RAW to process 90% of the shots I passed over. I think one thing that wasn't mentioned is "Picture Style" this can have a significant effect on the RAW output... basically I shot a whole wedding in "Fine Detail".. NOT something some of the ladies at the wedding appreciated.

[@tuftyhill]

Hi Ben I always shoot RAW because I have plenty of SD cards and Hard Drive storage plus I'd be gutted if there was an epic scene that I'd captured but only in jpeg and then find out I couldn't do it justice in post processing. For sharing on my own Facebook page jpegs are fine but for camera club comps especially if I'm going to print then RAW is definitely required. I do agree with you however if the photographer is just starting out and doesn't have the processing skills then jpegs are fine. For me it's more important to start seeing an image and capturing it then when you pick up more processing skills you can start shooting in RAW. I love the golden light that you captured on the building near the bridge, that was definitely my favourite image of the day.

[@SteveKershaw]

White balance can be changed on raw as it’s a post process, so if you get the WB wrong on Jpeg you don’t have the flexibility, JPEGs are fine if you know the limitations and are happy that you can work with them, if you are a beginner then jpegs and the profiles most cameras have is the best way forward

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Absolutely, completely agree. 👍

[@MikeRamsay]

Other way round surely? Beginners are more likely to shoot with the wrong WB, so need the safety net of raw to correct their mistakes later. More experienced photographers will shoot it right more often, and not need so much room to correct errors later, so a jpeg will give them enough? I’m fortunate to shoot Olympus mirrorless with 2 card slots - one for jpeg, one for raw backups. I rarely need the rows, and with WYSIWYG mirrorless the chances of shooting more than one or two images with the wrong settings are vastly reduced.

[@SteveKershaw]

@@MikeRamsay when you have no photography experience a modern camera is very complicated, needing to learn a raw processing software can be overwhelming for many, auto WB is very good 99% of the time on modern cameras, I would always advice to start with Jpeg until you get comfortable with the camera, maybe diferente for a tech savvy student,

[@thestudio1274]

I've never shot in Jpeg because I was always on the understanding that it was a no go on DSLR's, this has been really interesting and because my memory is quite small, it might be worth trying it out. Great video, really enjoyable, thank you so much for sharing.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Thank you so much for watching. Yeah it’s worth a go, you might be surprised with the results, I know I was. Thanks again and all the best. 👍

[@davidf6326]

Certainly try it out, but I'd recommend you shoot RAW + JPEG to ensure you have a plan B when your JPEG doesn't turn out quite the way you hoped, because sooner or later it will happen.

[@stevenhoward3358]

Some of the jpegs looked fine, however, some have hideous blown out cyan in the sky

[@sophietucker1255]

I started shooting back in 1970 when the cameras were more simple and film was the only choice. If you wanted to manipulate your image you shot on B/W film and did your magic in the darkroom and the same went for C-41 color prints. C-41 didn't lend itself to as much manipulation but you could work with it. Color transparencies or slide film was very hard to manipulate so you pretty much got what you shot. Slide film was the jpeg of its day and still is. While I do shoot in RAW way more than I do in jpeg I'm not intimidated by shooting in jpeg. I just pull out my old skill set from the color slide days and have fun.

[@billingalls1940]

Time for my old-guy hat again. When I got started in this hobby, color film was not only expensive, it was nigh on impossible for a hobbyist to develop. When kits for home processing finally became available, they were pricey and reportedly difficult to use, producing iffy results. I disdained flash photography and as a consequence had to request "special" handling to boost the ASA when I took my film in for processing. Any wonder that I prefer shooting RAW? As an aside, learning "composition" was a must. You had 24 or 36 shots on a roll of film. No screen on which to assess your results instantly, and no memory card to fill with crappy images until you got the one that made you content with your results.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

It’s a good job things have moved on the , although I wonder if there would be as many photographers today as there are with digital.

[@Macjohn1419]

The downfall of shooting JPG is that the image is cooked and very little can be done to correct errors with color casts and white balance. Also it limits cropping due to its smaller file size. You would need to shoot several images while zooming in if you plan to use a cropped image. No savings there.

[@josdenis3684]

In ideal weather conditions, JPEG is more or less ok, but in more challenging weather, give me RAW or at least RAW + JPEG all the time. The difference is very clear in LR.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Yes, I completely agree with your points on perfect weather/light, but I was expecting more of a difference when in Lightroom, the JPEG did have less options to push. Thanks for your comment. 👍

[@robbieledwith8437]

Raw for those of us who need more scope to produced a better image, raw is a necessary evil { hard drive nightmare}... as you gain experience / confidence you might get away with jpeg or blended jpegs. Thanks for a super vlog.

[@garrywatters1140]

When you view your photos on the back of your camera you are actually looking at a Jpeg rendered by the camera. RAW files look very flat initially which is where you work your base from.

[@JeffandLeslie]

if I get the exposure right or at least close, jpg works fine. If I miss exposure and want to salvage an image, I'll use the RAW. I shoot RAW to one card and jpg to the other card.

[@dominiclester3232]

A nice video and well worth doing, thanks! 2 mins in and the Jpeg sky colour is ridiculous, then at 5'35 the Jpeg sharpening has produced bad halos on the church...

[@nevvanclarke9225]

It depends on what you're shooting, and the light that you've got available. If it's an uneven light across the sensor. In other words, say you're shitting a sunset, and it's got a dark portion of the file, and then a very light you're going to need to shoot raw, you could still make a JPEG work if you wanted to stack five images in JPEG and do all that blah blah, but who wants to do that you just want to take single shots right I do cause. Saves time. There are elements of JPEG which are fantastic especially for street photography or just some basic family photos. Yep I will shoot JPEG but if I'm shooting landscapes I want the most detail and the most shadow recovery to be retained in the file. It also makes a difference later on when you go to print a file if you've done it in JPEG and then someone says to you I want to buy that photo and you print it. It will show up a little bit more that won't show up on your screen. But I do think there are horses for courses where you can shoot JPEG. I would say my percentage is probably about 80% raw 20% JPEG and I'll stick with that. Thanks for your video

[@sarahneedham]

When I started shooting with DSLRs i shot jpegs but since learning more about how to edit, I now only shoot RAW. I prefer RAW as I'm able to get so much more out of the image. On a side note, I couldn't help but notice your Sonos Era 300 😊.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Yeah I find it the best way to go, as you teach yourself processing then shoot RAW, it’s certainly the way to go. Oh yes the Sonos, it’s a new addition, and a very good addition too, love it. 👍

[@sarahneedham]

@@BenMcDonaldPhotography Sonos speakers and cameras are my 2 addictions 😆. I have too many of both!

[@garythrelfall8268]

Some of the best images I’ve seen of one of my favourite local locations- RAW for me personally 👍

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Thank you so much Gary, really appreciated. Yeah it is a glorious location. Thanks again and all the best. 👍

[@davidf6326]

Apart from maybe storage issues - which isn't actually much a problem these days - (edit - and the potential for higher speed continuous shooting, which few of us need) I really can't see any argument for NOT shooting RAW. JPEGs are a lossy format, so no matter the quality of your in-camera processing there will be some image degradation. Furthermore, using JPEG you lock-in any settings like white balance at the time of shooting and have far less capacity to rethink those elements later. With RAW all the original data is maintained, along with the editing flexibility that brings. True, it means every single photo, even quick snapshots, need some degree of post work. However, with most editing software having facilities to quickly apply camera profiles and other presets the amount of effort can be minimal. Of course, there's always the option to set the camera to record RAW and JPEG and get the best of both worlds. Again the only potential challenge is storage, but with the capacity for price of today's cards and HDDs, that's really not worthy of concern.

[@LambertFick]

JPEG+RAW, RAW is the backup, or if required its available.

[@gordonsimpson1020]

There’s nothing wrong with shooting jpeg except for tricky lighting conditions with high contrast where you really need RAW to bring out the best.

[@fly-pedro]

I definitely prefer to shoot in JPEG. The jpeg’s on my Nikon Z50 are so good I can’t even get a better image trying to edit the same RAW picture.

[@hjones451]

Perhaps for people who spend hours sat editing, shoot raw - If you shoot jpeg & raw, only upload to your raw to your computer if editing needed. Personally I shoot jpeg and no longer edit, more of a challenge in my opinion and Lightroom have outpriced their product anyway.

[@allenfutrelle9090]

Jpg for me, I have been shooting since 1971. The difference to me is negligible, IMHO.

[@hedydd2]

It matters not that the file is compressed in jpeg. What matters is what the image looks like. You seem to give the impression in your conclusion that only jpeg files can be post processed, which is very far from the truth. Also jpeg or HEIF use internal lens and picture corrections and the flexibility to use all kinds of useful features like 30+ frames a second, in camera focus stacking and blending, photo and art styles and many many others, depending on the camera model, including adjustable tone curves and so on. All minimising the work needed in post processing, if not totally eliminating it. There are only a few limitations compared to raw on modern cameras and the most striking is that raw gives a broader dynamic range allowing clipped areas to be somewhat better recovered and similarly deep shadow noise eliminated somewhat better, depending on the PP software used. All other post processing adjustments apply equally, for all practical purposes, to jpeg, HEIF and raw.

[@sierragold]

If you like to edit your images, shoot RAW. If you don't like to edit your images, shoot JPEG.

[@garyverstick1620]

I can shoot raw, struggle with bloated adobe software to end up with a shot that looks like my jpg OR shoot jpg 😁

[@juliansykes960]

JPEGS were way oversaturated and too contrasty. Some of those skies were truly destroyed 😢

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

Interesting you noticed that much of a difference between the two. I wouldn’t get that upset over it though! 😊

[@juliansykes960]

@@BenMcDonaldPhotography Upset! I’ve turned to drink over it 😉

[@AnotherBoring43yearold]

JPEG =amateur or paparazzi RAW = all others

[@mikepenney5726]

sorry this video is bs.

[@BenMcDonaldPhotography]

A little like this comment!

[@adamhurst4293]

I'd love to know the reason you say it's this? I guess it's easy to say when you have no idea what you're talking about and just need to put your unwarranted ridiculous comment just to get some attention.

[@adamhurst4293]

Haha, love it! @@BenMcDonaldPhotography