IS RAW BETTER? You may be surprised!

[@simon_dentremont]

Do you shoot RAW or JPEG? I’d love to know, and why!

[@izzed3500]

Yes. I shoot RAW on card 1 and JPEG on card 2. I adjust my settings to get the colors and white balance I want in camera to speed up my workflow. However, I still retain the RAW files if I need them for a particular shot. I have regretted NOT having them in the past. Also, this naturally creates a backup in case one card bites the dust.

[@MakeItTakeItOutdoors]

Raw only. After throwing so many Fujichrome slides away in the editing process decades ago, I wish I realized how powerful RAW and good editing is.

[@maddog1046]

I shoot in both. My editing skills are very limited and sometimes the camera's JPEG file comes out better than I can edit the raw file. My genre is underwater photography. RAW is a "MUST" when taking underwater photos as it is almost impossible to get the white balance right underwater! Another great video!!! Thank you very much for all you do on KZbin!!!

[@PhilIpp88]

RAW because it is future proof. Who knows how long we will use JPEG as a file format to compress photos. It is clearly outdated.

[@washingtonradio]

Both, I have the raw files for fast sharing but will edit the raw files later.

[@portblock]

I use to shoot RAW exclusively, and realized I was spending the time to try to make it a decent image by color processing it in light room. A lot of the time, the jpg looked better. Then I would move the image into photoshop to do the actual retouching for the client. What I noticed is, my workflow was exhaustive and only boosted my ego not my paycheck. Then one day, I was the head photographer for Los Angeles Fashion Week (not bragging, explaining) and one of the guys on the riser near me was shooting straight to jpg and was getting paid. I asked why, he said the jpg is good enough and better than what his clients (designers, magazines) were expecting. - Right then I realized, I am doing far more work than is needed. --- few weeks after I practiced more on shooting straight to jpg, was fine, and moving into client work, no complaints. So Today, I just do this: * High end commercial work: I shoot RAW medium format in my studio * Simple commercial work: JPG * Model digitials, agency headshots, jpg * Events: JPG What I learned, anyone can tell my why they are superior, why my workflow is no good, but at the end of the day, I shoot for luxury brands, NBC television, and runway and have no complaints from clients and repeat work.

[@simon_dentremont]

Cool! Thanks for sharing!

[@Daedalus33]

If it’s good enough for you good enough for me, sounds like spending the hours editing is better saved on touchups or other parts of the process

[@LegendEater]

cool for sharing your experience and do you agree with the point that raw allow more quality and mastering in your work ?

[@portblock]

​@@LegendEater I wish I could give a simple answer, but its more involved. for short, yes I think it can, but I don't think it always does. I believe its several parts, I leave the color science up to the people who make the camera to convert that raw data to jpg - granted, lightroom, capture one, have good profiles as well. maybe easiest if I give 2 examples where I think it helps, and one were I think it doesn't matter: #1: A straight to jpg on the beach with ocean in the back, there is going to be huge difference from light to dark, and the jpg will not express what the eye sees no matter what. - In this case a raw file can bring down the highlights, raise the shadows and you can get very close to what the eye sees. #2: when I shoot a commercial bathing suit campaign on the beach with an 8x10 screen behind model, an 8x8 scrim above, front fill flash. Then the jpg will be nearly if not exactly what I envisioned for the shot. I would also dare to say this shot would be better than the raw shot in #1 Now I am not saying raw is not good, I am not saying jpg is better than raw, what I am saying is: * Raw is a superior data carrier (like a negative vs print) * Raw can be better than jpg when things are not right * Raw is converted to jpg (most of the time) anyways so a jpg from camera can be deliverable * Camera JPG can provided extremely good end results when shot well. I look at it like this, I shoot with 20year old lenses, 99% of my students have brand new $3,000 - $5,000 lenses, waaay sharper than mine, but once you resize or retouch an image, kiss all that bleeding edge sharpness and lens IQ away. When I deliver a 50/100mp medium format jpg image to a client, they don't pixel peep, when its printed there is no pixel peeping. All in all, raw, latest and greatest is far superior, but far greater than most needs. I say most, not all, when I shoot a campaign its usually raw. sorry for long reply, I know it may sound contradictive, but each has its place, raw is better than jpg, but raw makes me no more money than shooting runway straight to jpg only, shooting raw only makes my workflow longer and more complicated, has zero financial benefit.

[@Lackmind]

​@@portblockthank you for sharing your experience

[@b34k97]

I'm a hobbyist and I used to shoot only RAW and edit in lightroom. Honestly, knowing that I'd have a bunch of work to do after shooting meant that I'd sometimes actually leave my DSLR behind when visiting some photogenic areas, and just take pictures with my phone because it was so much easier. Then about a year ago, when we were expecting our first baby, I got the green light from my wife to purchase a new mirrorless camera to photograph him. During the process of researching a new camera I found Ken Rockwell's article about shooting JPEG, saying that RAW is for those who like to "twiddle" around on computers, while JPEG is for those who like to take photos (and get it right the first time, in camera). That really resonated with me and I reconsidered my position on shooting RAW. Now I shoot RAW + Small JPEG Fine. This allows me to quickly export photos to my phone and share them, almost instantly after taking them. Once on my phone, I actually convert the JPEGs to HIEF images, which reduces the file-size by 8-10x with no noticeable changes to my eye. The "keeper" RAWs go to my NAS as a backup should I ever want to do anything extra with them. Occasionally I'll also edit RAWs in camera (like to Crop from a 45 MP Full-frame image to something more zoomed around a subject) before baking to JPEG and export. Overall, I find that focusing on JPEG first shooting has greatly increased both my usage and my enjoyment of using my camera.

[@anarchisttutor7423]

You've made me rethink. I think I'll do RAW+JPG, and only edit the RAW when the JPG doesn't look right.

[@Muslim-o5l3b]

Really appreciate your videos not having any annoying music. And great value.

[@ivybator6167]

Oh yes !

[@RooftopKoreansMusic]

it really is a secret in higher, more sophisticated editing to NOT have things like music for no reason. Truly and example of less is more

[@vanshikabhatnagar3739]

i left film school a year ago and i swear its videos like yours here on youtube that make me realise everything i need to know is here. thanks again, simon.

[@jonfreeman9682]

You said it. There is nothing to learn in school anymore. I realized the same thing. Colossal waste of time and money to learn absolutely nothing as in nada.

[@grahamstretch6863]

I was shooting a family party, hand holding a flash with modifier above my head. A guest approached me and explained that she was a photography teacher and it would be easier to bounce the flash off the ceiling to achieve the larger light source / separation from the axis that I was going for… so I just looked at her stunned, I think I managed not to 🙄. The ceiling was nicotine brown, it was crossed with 1ft deep beams and scattered with disco lights, mirror ball etc, l had to explain about the beams and clutter casting shadows in the bounce area and that the nicotine brown tinted light wasn’t an option in the white balance correction! Teachers, some are as dumb as a 🪨! 🤷‍♂️

[@garyross3453]

Perhaps another way of looking at it, is a baked cake (jpeg) vs. a cake recipe (RAW). Add too much sugar (balance) to the baked cake it's a struggle to make it taste good, but if the recipe has the wrong amount of sugar simply change the recipe and bake again. With RAW you can keep tweaking the recipe till it's as good as in can be. On the other hand, it's nicer to be given a cake and simply eat it :-)

[@thelogicalkrampus462]

Wonderfully put. Thank you!!!!

[@trevorclausen6945]

Same thing, but I went with steak, raw is right off the cow, jpeg is an already cooked steak being served to you, it looks good, but did you cook it and season it to your liking?

[@halilsmail512]

Ill save this for later :D good

[@kencroft7933]

On the other hand, if you have baked a cake to a recipe and it doesn't taste good, do you know have to alter the recipe to make the next cake taste good? This is my problem, no matter how much I fiddle with raw files, probably 50% of the time the jpg is better than the result I can make from the raw. So bearing in mind that I do not print and my photos are viewed either on un-calibrated computer monitors or on phones, I just stick to the ease of a jpg and keep raws for the odd time that an image has gone seriously wrong.

[@asbjrnhagennielsen6560]

Nice metafor. But remember the 'cake' (jpg) was backed by the recipe made by finest cooks in the world. Think you can do better? 🙂

[@stefanschug5490]

I have shot RAW for years and have worked for over 20 years with Photoshop. There is so much more flexibility regarding adjustments like luminosity masking, frequency separation and many other improvements when you have the RAW file. Nowadays, if you work with 32 bit image versions, there is not even a comparison to what you can bring out in an image and if you use plug-ins like the Nik collection, the limitations of the JPEG files become very obvious. In my opinion JPEGs are wonderful shortcuts for snapshots right out of the camera or to bring the edited end product into the media. Great video as always!

[@РобертКіш-с9ц]

Thank you, Simon for being not just a great photographer but also a great teacher. Your videos really changing my thoughts about many things in photography.

[@simon_dentremont]

Great to hear!

[@qtrfoil]

Hard agree, it's wonderful to get the word from a world-class photographer. An awful lot of what I run into on KZbin (and blogs) is people who are good on camera. When they show their images, though, I'm thinking "No. Noooo. Why would I listen to you?" For Simon's videos I enjoy the stills even more than the video!

[@HenryBLeeNYC]

Agreed! I've been a professional photographer for 40 years, and have already learned a lot from the 2 videos I've watched so far.

[@jonfreeman9682]

I've only watched 2 videos one on how much MP you need in a camera and this Raw vs JPG and have learned more than thousands of dollars of photography school.

[@ppBizU]

Hello Simon, I really admire quality of the content and correctness. As a programmer, that knows implementation details of JPEG/PNG - I wouldn't explain it better than you in more affordable language. You're doing a great job!

[@simon_dentremont]

Cool, thanks!

[@PaulMansfield]

Yes, I thought that was excellent, it didn't dumb it down like some and so avoided being misleading.

[@Michael-fw5ef]

Simon, you are the greatest photography youtuber I have come across: 1) Your pictures are amazing - they match Mark Smith's level of talent 2) You teach me more info across 4 or 5 videos than I have learned in 6 years of trying to learn on my own 3) Your explanations are SO EASY to understand Finding you on KZbin a month ago has already made my pictures 3 times as good as they were before I discovered your channel Do you know how good you are? I hope so.

[@simon_dentremont]

Too kind!

[@regentgray762]

@@simon_dentremontnot too kind, too accurate!!

[@jarekluberek8123]

Have to agree. Pictures are stunning. I was a photography enthusiast in my youth but I clearly didn't have that kind of talent.

[@crweewrc1388]

You are the kind of creators on KZbin that I love. Spreading useful information which can also help us in our lives and are really helpful. Thank you so much! ❤

[@simon_dentremont]

You are so welcome!

[@thewoodys_surf_instrumental]

You have a gentle common sense way of sharing and shedding new light on things we probably already knew, but your way of explaining things is refreshing with no filler. Also, your wildlife photos capture animals personality like no other. If only the animals could see the way you captured their beauty in your wonderful calendar :)

[@simon_dentremont]

Too kind! Thanks very much!

[@ardnfast]

Well put 👏👏👏

[@r4yker442]

"Shooting JPEGs only" is also great for beginning photographers - that way we have to think about what to capture "right now" instead of having that constant "I'll fix it in post" thought in the back of our heads - no way of cranking that exposure up or down, heavy cropping, massive denoising or excessive color grading, what matters is what camera "saw" at that summit/valley/street.

[@markg3124]

What beginners should consider doing is shooting RAW + JPEG, then they can see how well they handled the camera viewing the JPEG but work the RAW file to a better more refined final image.

[@Gullie1987]

Its extraordinary how well you explain everything in your videos, so everyone can understand it, even someone who is just a beginner and still doesn't know much about photography and all the terms used.

[@paultheriault9932]

You make some very well informed and compelling content. Honest and straight forward. The many compliments already made are well deserved. Enjoyable content, keep up the good work.

[@Borzoi86]

Best fifteen minutes of effective digital photo training I've ever seen. Thank you! -- This also confirms my desire to stay in JPEGland simply because I'd rather be shooting and not endlessly bit-twiddling in front of a computer monitor.

[@jamesbell8730]

I vote for RAW and JPEG, I review my JPEG for the best, picking the keepers then I save only the RAW keepers for additional processing. Works to speed up my workflow, remember take lots of photos and delete most.

[@ratansharma951]

'Delete most'......excellent phrase. That's what encourages us to take better photos. A few good photos are better than thousands of 'what's this' photos.

[@nebula_M42]

I had like a thousand question on this matter and you left me with a million answers. You are fantastic, thank you so much!

[@NebulaChavez]

I always shoot in JPEG and I also learned that I make sure my lighting and color are balanced at the source (my camera) . Thank you for making this great video

[@robertspence5071]

You have a very engaging teaching style. I am a newbie, just having acquired a Canon R10, and I've watched a number of R10 tutorials, focusing on settings a beginner should use. Some say JPEG only and others say RAW only, but none of the videos I've watched explain it as helpfully as you have in this video. Thank you!

[@simon_dentremont]

Glad to help!

[@boardgame.oclock]

I just discovered your video - following your channel and binge watching all the videos now and learning something new from every video. They are made so well, so well explained and so eloquently and easily communicated. Thank you for your service to the photography community. Much respect from Pakistan

[@philcadorette1383]

As an hobbyist photographer I have settled on shooting in raw/jpeg for each photo. Many times I shoot in difficult light conditions and simply don't have the time to make the changes. This set up gets the best of both worlds for me. While traveling I can connect my camera to a monitor or tv and share with everyone around and back home I can post process the raw images that will be printed. I use Darktable for raw processing and Gimp for jpeg processing. They both work great ! Thanks for the great video !

[@russellbaston974]

I shoot Raw+jpeg as well and depending on the job I alter the size of the jpeg, small jpeg's allow going through the images/files very quickly for choosing the best, then process the Raw. In a studio situation where colour temoerature and lighting ratio can be controlled to a high degree one can just use the jpeg, majority straight out of camera.

[@annekedebruyn7797]

Same! RAW to one card, jpeg to the second one.

[@lassewirzenius9119]

Hello Simon! You are absolutely the best teatcher here in KZbin! I love your videos. You also speak so clearly that it is so easy to understand for poeple who are not english speaking.

[@simon_dentremont]

You're very welcome!

[@brucegraner5901]

I worked as a newspaper photographer for over 40 years and we always shot JPEGs when we went to digital about 1999. We did have a photographer on our staff who shot RAW but most of us on the staff felt out JPEGs looked better at the speeds we were having to work, sometimes two or three packages a day with one or two videos. Great video.

[@SwissNetHawk]

So you went digital for speed and flexibility, then JPEG IS the best tool for your needs. And your images were printed in newspapers and not blown out to large prints. Another good reason to settle with JPEG. However, today's cameras can shoot RAW and JPEG at the same time. Why not use this mode to get the best of both worlds? Meaning: if you ever shoot a very special and rare event, you can lightroom the hell out of your RAW, while still being able to deliver a JPEG instantly. Just a thought...

[@whatmeworry2006]

I too am a working press photographer and have never shot raw. Deadline is an understatement!

[@lucuslopez6866]

​@@SwissNetHawk When your competing with other news outlet/photographers to get the story out faster, you don't have the luxury of spending a hour editing photos. A lot of their photos go online now and not in print.

[@jonfreeman9682]

Totally agree. JPG all the way even though a lot of pros look down on it the reality is visually you can't tell the difference. That being said there are use cases for Raw as well.

[@michaelmullen8373]

As a 30 plus year graphics professional (Art Director, Graphic Designer, Illustrator and print maker) photography has always been an important tool) I recently upgraded to my first Mirrorless camera and your videos have been extremely helpful with this transition and in making photographs again as part of my graphics profession. Your explanation of RAW v JPG has been the best technical and practical use explanation that I have seen. THANK YOU!!

[@joshmobijohn]

Simon you’ve quickly become one of my favorite photography channels on KZbin! I almost always shoot both but 99% of the time the end images I’m editing are the JPEG files. It’s very rare that I end up editing the RAW image. For me it’s only there as a safety net.

[@photomaker4502]

I do mostly landscape photography. People are astonished that I choose to shoot in JPEG. I do it mainly to challenge myself. I kind of pretend I'm shooting film. I use grad filters, polarizers, the whole thing. I get some really interesting results. I find shooting in JPEG (similarly shooting with film) has taught me to slow down, focus on my surroundings, looking for eye catching compositions, and of course light. Thank you Simon for bringing very interesting topics to your channel!

[@simon_dentremont]

If you can get the jpeg right, RAW should be easy! Nice!

[@frankfurter7260]

Why don’t you shoot blindfolded. To further challenge yourself. I find it challenging enough to try to shoot an interesting photo that I or anyone else would want to look at for more than a nanosecond.

[@mwwhited]

Because some of us enjoy time behind the camera more than time screwing around on the computer. Just like when doing film I could push/pull stops and nudge/burn negatives but I’d rather just get my shot in camera. There are also things you can do in camera that are not the same as in post such as shooting color filters. Getting the balance right though the lens will always be better than trying to fake it later in photoshop.

[@thegreatsiberianitch]

​@@frankfurter7260?

[@aretwodeetoo1181]

Your analogy is bad. If you had shot film you would know that you have an incredible amount of agency in the development and printing processes. Then your analogy would become that raw to image file conversion is the modern equivalent of that agency. You thinking that process is like shooting film tells me unambiguously that you never shot, developed and printed film...

[@arasul]

The information in this video brought in tremendous value for a casual photographer like me who has a DSLR. Very informative. Loads of information. Simon, you explain very well. Thank you very much indeed.

[@simon_dentremont]

Glad it was helpful!

[@ardie3523]

Great explanation as always, Simon! Quick note for those watching with Sony cameras, "Picture Profile" is for video recording, while "Creative Style" is for stills and includes the adjustability for JPGs like contrast, saturation, sharpness, plus more if on the latest generation.

[@simon_dentremont]

Thanks for the info!

[@TurkeyJoe]

I sent the link to this video to my mum who is an avid birder, she often complains that her photos weren't looking great even though she spent quite a lot on some really good gear. I think that when capturing photos of birds, you may often have the bird (dark plumage etc) backed by a blue sky that gets blown out when shooting in JPG. I've convinced her to try capturing in RAW and now she can learn so much more from you too! Thanks!

[@orvvro]

2:41 Sony's 'Picture Profile' is for video mostly, where you can set the gamma and color-space. Sony calls what you're referring to 'Creattive Look'

[@calmconfident]

I was confused for a moment. Thanks for clarifying this up. ❤

[@IndigoEyePhotography]

[1] It's also worth noting that the histogram is typically based on the JPEG processing too. That means that, even if you're shooting in RAW, you might want to switch to a flatter profile with reduced contrast to give yourself a better idea of the range of details being captured in the RAW file. [2] Canon has an application called Picture Style Editor which allows users to create custom Picture Styles. The options in the program are far more advanced than the simple sliders available on the camera itself (ex. curves, selective adjustment for specific colors such as skin tones, etc.), and you can even download or share Picture Styles with other people online. A lot of photographers obsess over post-processing techniques and tools for converting RAW files into JPEG output, but there's hardly any content or guides out there that showcase the potential of pre-processing.

[@tonygibbons5]

Jonathan, where do we find this picture style editor other than in the camera?

[@tonygibbons5]

@@IndigoEyePhotography thank you 🙌 I have Eos Utility but had no idea about this!

[@CampersInternational]

Thanks Simon, I can totally relate to this video. I used to shoot weddings with Fuji and used JPEG+RAW. But in 98% I only used the JPEGs. RAW was only required, if I had to do a major edit - which was less than 2% of the images taken.

[@Oseiwe]

This is my position too. RAW is a needless waste of time that somehow is tied to people's egos. It should be like a spare tyre -- in case you need it. Most people in my world don't even know how to use a camera, yet they're all shooting RAW and what they produce from it is always a joke --- people looking like plastic dolls. They do this in a studio by the way, where everything is supposed to be controlled

[@texassasquatch6467]

Your channel is phenomenal. Thank you for teaching me so much.

[@johnrees44..G4EIJ]

Simon..I’ve only just discovered your channel, but, after watching only 3 of your videos, I am convinced that I need look no further for videos to tell me everything I need to know about making the best use of my camera! Your detailed explanations of how to use a camera are amazingly informative, and watching your videos is totally addictive!! Many thanks..John..Bristol..UK

[@simon_dentremont]

Welcome aboard!

[@LifeofCharlie19]

It's great to discover an excellent new channel for the first time as I did this channel a couple of days ago. I used to do jpeg only but now do RAW +jpeg quite often, then using some in camera processing to make different jpegs from the RAW file. I ought to try some computer image processing but have to get a new computer first and I'm not a big fan of computers!

[@simon_dentremont]

Welcome aboard!

[@banginghats2]

I've been shooting RAW almost exclusively for nearly twenty years and never regretted the change. Better colours, better shadow and highlight detail, and being able to salvage exposure errors or very contrasty light conditions are the reasons why. The few times I've used JPG, I always regretted it. This happened a few times around 2004 to 2007 when CF cards were much smaller and more expensive per MB and I was running out of space, so switched to JPG to get more shots.

[@ElementaryWatson-123]

The only time I was shooting jpeg was when LR had a really ugly Adobe profile for Canon RP and nothing else was available. Other than that I can't think of ever wanting to limit myself by JPEG.

[@banginghats2]

@@ElementaryWatson-123 Like I said, there were times I was forced to use jpg because I was running out of space. It's an awful choice, but slightly better than not getting any more shots at all.

[@DarrellThompson47]

When I started shooting digital, for the first few months I shot only JPEG and now I regret that. I would love to re-edit some of those shots using the modern software we have now. I see no reason to even shoot Raw + JPEG as if I want straight JPEG's that can easily be done on my PC by batch converting using settings in Photolab that give a better image than straight from my camera.

[@banginghats2]

@@DarrellThompson47 I think the only case for JPGs now is news and sports photographers who have to send live pix back the their agencies or clients and a few seconds here or there could make all the difference, especially if they were up against other photographers and there were bandwidth constraints.

[@JustDisc]

I’d never waste my life constantly retouching photos. The photo market is over saturated with photos anyways, and someone is always going to be doing a better job than you. Video is where it’s at these days and they pay a lot more 👍

[@kasykaczanowski2205]

Another top notch, no fluff, extremely well done lesson in photography by Simon! 😅

[@kerc]

This is one of the best technical photography channels out there, period.

[@ghw7192]

Once upon a time, I shot a lot of RAW, but when I sold my studio and retired, I stopped doing that. I now shoot JPEG exclusively, resulting in me having two very large, very fast computers with lots of storage and loaded with photo editing software that are sitting idle. Excellent video.

[@shanobuo]

Good information! Thanks. Couple minor points added: 1) if you shoot using RAW+JPEG, it will be much slower as the camera will have to process the images into JPED and stores TWO files. Thus it will take longer and occupy more storage space. 2) Each camera might use different built-in JPEG conversion software. Thus the generated quality will differ. 3) You can use some compression software (such as 7z) to compress your RAW files when you store the images on your NAS or cloud storage. It's lossless. So you can save some space without sacrificing the image quality.

[@kagezen]

I was never one interested in technical details. But this video of yours made me really understand the nuances and differences from these 2 file formats. Thank you very much i have learnt something new today!

[@bencushwa8902]

A lot of my work is done in situations with wildly fluctuating lighting conditions. Shooting RAW gives me much more dynamic range to work with, and gives me a bit more wiggle room in case I end up with a slightly blown exposure. I toggled between RAW for those conditions and JPEG for "easier" conditions for a while, but then I settled on just shooting RAW all of the time because only having a single workflow was more of a benefit to me than the smaller file size and universality of JPEG.

[@kevinbalmer427]

I, like many of my fellow photo group, shoot both RAW and JPEG. When it's time to process I use the JPEG's... there are occasions where I just can't get what I want from the JPEG and its then, and only then, that I import the RAW file. It's pretty rare that I actually need the RAW file.

[@simon_dentremont]

Smart strategy Kevin.

[@travelrideandfly8355]

doesn't this slow down your camera for hi speed bursts ?

[@kevinbalmer427]

@@travelrideandfly8355 It would UNLESS you buy a camera with a huge buffer! For example, I shoot the Sony A1 so I have never able to hit a buffer slow down even and 30fps when I shoot huge bursts.

[@travelrideandfly8355]

@@kevinbalmer427 thanks. I shoot (as hobbyist) a6600. Doesn’t have the same performance, but still pretty good. But never tried raw in burst mode, because of this reason. I will test it just for experience.

[@iandisney4872]

I do the same. I set the Fuji simulation to the one I want and ensure the histogram is as far over to the right as possible. I then save all the jpegs to Google Photos and maybe do some processing if required. If I can't bring the dark tones up sufficiently then and only then I send a copy across to Lightroom from the raw file, manipulate then save that image as a jpeg to Google and delete the original. It's taken me a little while to work this out but this is the best work flow for me.

[@smokeymc22]

I used to shoot in raw because that is what I was told photographers should shoot in. Now I set my camera to shoot in both raw (card 1) and jpeg (card 2). I am a hobbyist that shoots mainly wildlife and when I get back from an outing, I load the jpegs on the computer first and take a look at my days' work. If I am happy with them, I won't bother spending the time converting the raw files. I used to spend hours processing raw files but for wildlife jpegs seem to work fine for me. If I think I can improve a photo using the raw file I try using Photo Shop but seldom can I make it better.

[@piotrlisowski2012]

If jpg looks better then you are doing something wrong/not enough in post production

[@athmaid]

@@piotrlisowski2012 or the camera is doing something right. The algorithms have become really good

[@piotrlisowski2012]

@@athmaid yes but camera can't do dodge and burn , can't recover details in too dark shadows or bright highlights can't do advanced colour correction etc. It's essential to eventually learn to use those advantages It really feels like buying a sports car only to drive it 50km/h in crowded city

[@alwilliams5177]

In the film days, what we do in post processing was handled by the photo lab tech. If you brought in a neg for custom enlargement, the lab tech would control color, burning and dodging, etc.. Do you want the best image regardless of time and size? RAW or RAW+. If you are looking for "good enough" as quickly as you can get it with minimum resources, JPEG. Just remember, you can make as many jpeg's as you want from raw but once you throw away that raw info, you can't get it right. If you want maximum quality and control, join those of us shooting film in our 4x5 view cameras. I only make 3 or 4 images per week, but having already made thousands of images, that's fine with me. 100MP scans rock.

[@g0fvt]

Thank you for a balanced view on the subject, prompted by the video I tried a couple of lossless compression utilities to compress a RAW file. Unsurprisingly they failed to save any disc space. I am just a hobbyist photographer, the inner geek drives me to use RAW but it predictably slows the camera down. I guess it does highlight just how powerful the processors in our cameras are, where they can pretty well instantaneously do very complicated mathematics to the RAW to produce a JPG and the bottleneck is writing to the memory card.

[@dennijones2]

Beside being an excellent photographer, you are an excellent presenter. Clear, concise, informed.Thank you

[@20111111jorg]

Wonderful summary! The best I've ever seen from one video. I always shoot JPEG. Not only for all the reasons you mentioned, but since photos are art and not science, perfection is not required. Most of my audience are non photographers and will not notice the small imperfections associated with JPEG compression, plus they won't be looking at them with a large detailed screen like I do. When I shoot, I usually underexpose to watch highlights as the darks are more forgiving. And when I edit, I make sure to do it all in one setting and never re-open and re-edit.

[@jGNFX]

"Photography is a science, and we use it to make art "

[@raphaelschmidt7033]

Unbelievable Simon Another Video with knowledge, full of needful information! I'm right at the beginning of, let's say, starting to take pictures. All, and I mean really all Videos from you are full of necessary content. And as I mentioned at a different video : for me, as a German and not native speaker, yours are much better explained, than those in German. Congratulations and go ahead! Even if I started with taking pictures now, I have some little experience, making videos for friends with small content. So I know, how much work it is, to deliver such videos in this quality. 🤯 Greatings from good old Germany By the way. I'm shooting in raw and jpeg. Jpegs for the fast effort and raws, when I retire and have more time for this day filling hobby. 🙋🏼‍♂️Raphael

[@simon_dentremont]

Danke! I need to use English, cause meine Deutche ist nicht sehr gut!

[@dougsaroma]

Great explanation! No problem with people shooting RAW, but I never do. I shoot sports and wildlife, and often thousands of exposures per outing, sometimes with multiple cameras. I don't need the massive file sizes in camera, or in my storage drives, as well as the extra time spent editing, as well as needing different advanced software options to process RAW files. Also chews up more battery, which is crucial when shooting tons of exposures, and in some cases may slow down performance. In some cases RAW may be the way to go. But with today's technology a JPG can be edited and corrected and pushed great deal more than just a few years ago, and in most cases a good JPG file has similar potential for editing. I might take a shot at RAW sometime when copying my old slides with a lens adapter. It would probably be great for that, and some other things.. But I think way too many people who aren't pro photographers shoot RAW because they think they will lose quality with the end product shooting JPG, which is rarely true.

[@wayneholmes637]

In my case it is true. The Canon jpegs are no match for even a quick and dirty edit in Capture One. The difference is huge.

[@BurhanMuntasser]

This is one of the absolute top best two 2 or 3 channels related to photography among all of the ones I follow on YT. You give precise to the point information that is actually educational and helps in understanding various concepts in photography bar none. Thank you and please keep up the great work you are doing!! Best wishes from sunny and warm Libya!!

[@simon_dentremont]

Thanks so much! I’m working on a wildlife photography video course. Can I use your comment in promotional material, with atribution?

[@BurhanMuntasser]

@@simon_dentremont You have my permission to use my comment in the promotional material for your wildlife photography video course. Good luck to you, I wish you all the best. Is your photography video course available now or is it under development?

[@jefffitlow9587]

Great stuff. Really like how you simplify and do not waste time. Good work.

[@patrickmckeag3215]

Another great video. Thanks. I'm just a hobbyist photographer and I tried shooting RAW but gave up on it because I ended up with the same or worse results than the JPEG version of the image. When you shoot RAW you are in effect saying "I can do a better job processing this image than my camera can." That may be true for some people, and of course, you can do so Simon, and many other pro photographers as well, but I couldn't see the point in messing with RAW for the type of photos I take.

[@colintraveller]

What do you capture ??

[@patrickmckeag3215]

@@colintraveller Portrait shots at family gatherings, landscape shots of my neighbourhood when I'm out walking. I live in a semi-rural setting.

[@ElementaryWatson-123]

Even default preset I have in Lightroom on import always gives better results than OOC JPEG. Everybody should shoot raw (except those who were confused in buying a camera instead of shooting with their phones), pictures need to be edited anyway to just do the basics, you need to crop, you need to straighten the horizon, you need to lift up shadows, you need to reduce the highlights to save the blue skies, etc. etc. Anybody shooting JPEG don't care about the quality of their images and wasted money on camera they don't need.

[@kreutzere]

It happened the same to me. Few months ago I switched to JPG exclusive. I compared my post processed picture with my jpg and while some features were better overall my final result is not better (definitely in noise reduction). Also you need to invest more time to process your photos I don't want to do anymore. And many many other reasons people should consider shooting in JPG.

[@liv0003]

​​@@kreutzeremaybe shooting Raw+jpeg is the right solution . You can always delete some of your raw pictures if you think that they aren't special/good enough to be edited in post production or if you think the Jpeg version is good enough in some cases. But about the one that you really really like having the ability to have the RAW version saved is a good thing because you can always edit the picture after with Lightroom or other programs and you will have a higher quality image for your chosen "special pictures ".

[@TimFurman123]

As a hobbyist who has started to turn some very basic knowledge into wedding photography extra cash, I can tell you that I'm glad to be shooting in cRAW +Jpeg on my Canon R6 because I can almost always rescue the cRAW file from my own mistakes while shooting under pressure. If I've taken a lousy shot of a great scene in some dark corner of a wedding hall, I can absolutely work magic on that photo in post if I'm using the cRAW. Although for 90% of the shots, the JPEG is just fine. Between this video and your histogram video, I feel like I've figured out half of what my camera is trying to tell me.

[@theupcman]

As a hobbyist, I have always wondered what the big fuss was about shooting RAW. I found your explanation of RAW vs. Jpeg very clear and concise. You have just gained a new subscriber. Keep up the good work!!

[@simon_dentremont]

Welcome aboard!

[@Bike_Lion]

@Oldman666 - Try actually *reading* the full comment before replying to it. If you had, you'd know that he *did* watch the video.

[@xodius80]

Hi Simon, I habe been doing this for event work, just working with jpegs, but i have done a lot of raw to lightroom testing, Lightroom in particular does Honor the colors you tweak on camera, so the raw files, lets say, you on canon tweak the WB Shift to B2 M2, in light room, it does retain the color swift you do even if you change on LR the color rendition from CAMERA SETTINGS or use the ADOBE COLOR profile you choose. So in other words the RAW does change its parameters if you tweak the picture profile settings. For me this is great you can alter it, because my copy of the Tamron 24-70g2 HAS a yellow tint that drove me crazy. so to compensate (even on jpegs) i use the B2 M2 to get rid of the native yellow tint of my lens.

[@alex320]

Damn, I watched 3 videos and already subscribed. Normally I take longer especially since there are so many creators in the photography space. Your videos are really helpful, keep up the good work.

[@JikoMuskato]

Personally I shoot both JPG and RAW. JPG for quick access to the pictures and RAW for when I have time to get the best quality out of certain pictures. And after this video I just switched my camera to compressed RAW. Thanks!

[@anthonyleatherwood]

Hey Simon! I shoot raw, because it allows me flexibility in post processing/editing! Often times we photographers have strange lighting conditions, and sometimes want to take a photo regardless of the lighting situation. But IF you shoot RAW, there's no loss of information, thus, we can move the highlights and shadows around, or bring up/down the exposure, because all of that data was all retained in the raw file. And raw allows us to saturate colors and really stretch the image to it's full potential or to our liking, and all without strange artifacts that would be visible if you were shooting jpeg!

[@Mr_Beagle]

That’s exactly what Simon says in the video… 🤔 Both formats are tools - just gotta pick the right one for the job in hand 👍

[@laurazundel5214]

Thank you! As a newbie to photography you make it easy to understand. Love your work.

[@simon_dentremont]

Happy to help!

[@seanphillthephotosgrimsley2888]

This is the second video of yours I've watched today and in my opinion your explanation of how to use a camera is by far the best yet. I've seen a lot of videos on this subject but none explained as well as this. Thank you sir.

[@danielschmaderer]

With my Fuji camera, I usually shoot RAW + JPEG in case I capture an image that I absolutely love and want to take time editing. Rather than that, I usually don’t mind the JPEGs that come out.

[@RogierYou]

Agreed! However I found that I never open the raw files. Instead I use the various film simulations and custom presets. I plan an think before I shoot….😊

[@gordon8858]

Hi Simon, after 40+ years covering photojournalism and weddings working with film along with always working with Canon equipment and then transitioning to digital, your video has made a big grey area somewhat more apparent. I personally chose to work with JPEG for ease of handling and never really had any editing issues. today I prefer to work with RAW for the amount of editing that is available. Great Video and some stunning pictures. Thank you. Gordon, Halifax, UK.

[@eriztonoqarzwoss]

Right! In tricky situation where lighting is difficult or unpredictable, it pays to shoot in RAW. The extra exposure latitude gives you more room for exposure corrections or enhancement.

[@abrahamtomahawk]

I've always shot in RAW because of the flexibility it gives you. But if you're pushed for time, getting them sorted and changed into JPEGs for easy printing, posting etc can be a bit of a pain. I've got loads of photos just sitting on my laptop because I've not had the time to go through them all. Thanks for the videos from the Highlands of Scotland.

[@simon_dentremont]

Welcome!

[@youssefhamidi8152]

Such a fantastic video and the best Ive seen on this subject. Clear, concise and precise as well as easy to understand.

[@simon_dentremont]

Glad it was helpful!

[@buffalonickels657]

Great video, thanks! One of my favorite expressions is “there is no substitute for practice” and you’re pretty much saying the same thing at the end. Let’s get after it. We’re burning daylight!

[@UrošNikolić-d6i]

A lot of people are commenting on RAW being an only viable option when it comes to post. I would really like for some of you to try using JPEGs for post too. JPEGs are not at all uneditable. I haven't shot RAW in god knows how long and to be honest, I don't miss it at all. Belive me that JPEGs can be post-produced too, the only time I can see difference is when moving sliders to more 90 (ex. Shadows +90, Highlights -90,...) but I tend to focus on getting my exposure right so I dont have to do that ever, and it's been serving me great.

[@JAMESDOWDELL-dv9se]

My perspective on shooting in JPEG is that it is ultimately the same as shooting with a reversal film stock. Those films created slides of a positive image that also offered no further creative control. But by shooting in JPEG, you get to appreciate the best possible file compression capabilities of this format, very important when considering efficient distribution, .

[@xeroforhire]

I really appreciate how you bring a positive perspective to these topics. I too was led to believe that Rob was the only option, but as an event, you make a very compelling case for jpeg

[@stephen6815970]

Included in the RAW file is a JPG version. Easy to extract. Best to shoot RAW as you have more options and more control. If you need JPG, one card is RAW and second card is JPG, or shoot and save as raw + JPG so you have both right away. Lightroom is not the only game in town. Lots of other, cheaper, and just as good and very powerful software packages out there. Even free or included software with the computer usually allows extracting and reading the JPG from a RAW file.

[@usssoutherncross377thmsgme6]

Thank you once again for a clear and understandable explanation. It has helped me enormously with this issue. I shoot JPEG because I haven't been able to find a program that takes my RAW images. I started to feel I was a lesser photographer by shooting in JPEG.

[@juanitakelly3082]

Thanks for making me feel better about shooting in JPEG. I do it for all the reasons you mentioned and now I know why!

[@thepirateshoots]

I shoot jpg (M size) + RAW. When I am not satisfied with my jpg, or I want big pics for a photo book, I convert from RAW, where I can easily adjust White Balance, color or exposure. For simple contrast adjustment however, I use the histogram tool in Canon DPP, where I can adjust jpg files by simply drawing an s-curve.

[@VincentTamer]

You are an excellent teacher, thanks for sharing your techniques with us!

[@simon_dentremont]

You're very welcome!

[@jasonericksen4545]

This information is outstanding. Easy to digest by people new to the world of photography. Thank you so much.

[@DanielVijoi]

I love your videos...on point, easy to understand, with examples and lots of tips. Thank you!

[@simon_dentremont]

Glad you like them!

[@zakariachami4723]

No one in youtube can deliver these detailed information like you, thank you very much

[@simon_dentremont]

So nice of you

[@kerc]

Yep, Professor d'Entremont! :)

[@esphilee]

I usually shot both formats into separate cards in my camera. I use the JPG most of the time. Keeping the RAW as fall-backs, in case I need to post process excessively The camera can produce pretty good JPGs most of the time, unless I mess up the settings like WB, Exposure or style. My RAW file are mostly not catalogued, as they weight down LR. They are kept in separate drive outside LR. If I ever need them, I refer the name of the JPGs in LR, and then search for it. That way I can start the labeling, tagging and adjustment immediately with JPG, as loading RAW file and building the preview weights down on LR.

[@adriangabura5157]

This is what I do too. If you can afford lenses worth hundreds of dollars, storage is meager by comparison. It depends on the subject, but if it's the usual irrelevant photos, JPEG is fine a lot of the time. But if you want to do artistry, better get storage and not lose what might have been a good shot. Computers are great, automation is great, sometimes they fail though.

[@brianmoffitt8119]

You didn't mention RAW + JPEG. Depending upon subject it is what I shoot most often simply because it gives me the option to capture the scene for later post processing while still having the "quick" copy to email to friends or post online.

[@jonathanlavoie3115]

Yes he mentioned it !

[@pollaraproductions3688]

Thanks! Your videos are excellent. Clearly explain everything thoroughly without getting bogged down in techno speak. So many KZbin videos gloss over details, steps or go way too fast.

[@jamesmcgall8234]

Getting our first pro-grade camera and your videos are the most digestable and informative pieces as we begin experimenting with lenses, settings and taking lots of photos. Thank you so much 👍

[@simon_dentremont]

Awesome, thank you!

[@ZumJane42]

I'm a wildlife photographer but not professional. I work a 40 hour a week job so time is not something I have a lot of. Shooting in JPEG gives me more flexibility especially with the camera not getting bogged down. I do like the idea of compressed RAW and will check into that! Thanks so much for all your super informative videos.

[@Bike_Lion]

Shooting both jpeg and raw (or compressed raw) might be a good option for you.... You could then delete most of your raw files (to reduce storage demand), but if you happen to get one really great shot, or a unique shot that *would be* great, if it weren't for balance and such being off, then you'd have the option of messing around with it in post production. I do agree though that for folks with more limited time/energy, jpeg is often the best option, as it's simply ready to go, directly off the card, leaving you more time for actual shooting and going to/from your shoots 🙂

[@simonworrall7950]

Thanks for a very balanced coverage of both formats.

[@simon_dentremont]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@Hikemaine207]

You are such a great teacher! Thank you for what you do.

[@richardosuave5137]

Thanks for the videos Simon, really helping this noob undertsand more about these otherwise complex photography and camera issues. 👍

[@pluggedfinn-bj3hn]

The benefit of JPEGs when shooting burst depends on the camera and memory card you're using. I was shooting at an event, using my old camera as backup with different lens, tried to take a burst with it and it stopped after just few pics. I the checked what was up and realized it was shooting JPEGs and the buffer filled because it couldn't process them fast enough. I switched to RAW and it doubled the burst length. Not sure if there was some other setting that was the issue (anti-noise algorithm or something, it was kinda dark in there), but didn't have time to look into it, and 95% of pics were with my main camera anyway. When I upgrade to my camera, I'll probably start shooting RAW+JPEG

[@kennyj604]

I've always shot JPEG. Because I'm lazy and most importantly my first digital camera was a Pentax K100D. And I loved what came straight outta camera. Something about CCD sensors. Years later I still shoot in JPEG with multiple brands and mounts and experimenting with settings. The only time I have shot RAW is when I shot weddings for friends and family.

[@kerc]

I only recently started shooting in RAW with my Sony A100, and the amount of fine tuning and processing that's available on Affinity Photo is mind-blowing. Ended up with much more natural looking photos!

[@wayneholmes637]

I find Affinity not to be very user friendly, these days I only use it if Intend to do something with the rest of the Affinity suite. Otherwise for quick and simple landscapes I use Luminar 4. For everything else I find that Capture one is both easier to use and gives far better results.

[@Spillerrec]

A technical nitpick: JPEG does not use psychovisual models, it is a simple static (depending on compression level) fourier based algorithm. Newer image and video formats do take human perception into account, but JPEG is over 30 years old and thus quite simple. But that is probably a good thing if you want to edit the images, as it will mess with any psychovisual assumptions. Something to keep in mind is if you archive your images, the RAWs will get better in the future, while JPEGs will be stuck in the past. New stuff like AI denoising, super resolution, HDR gradation, etc. will make old RAWs shine. I processed some old RAW files from a Canon DSLR from 2006 for displaying on HDR monitors and they looked stunning compared to the JPEGs. Technology will continue to move forward and having the unprocessed data will allow you to take advantage of newer and better image processing in the future.

[@ondrejrypacek7949]

It is much more complicated. Bit rate is not the only difference between jpeg and raw. It is not just a downsampled raw.

[@gregsullivan7408]

Completely false, and our host got it 100% right. Please refer to the Wikipedia page on "JPEG", in particular, the JPEG Compression section.

[@tonimena1121]

Man I'm always blown away by the incredible quality of these videos

[@noahhoffman4475]

i love how you find examples to keep the video interesting and relatable. keep up the great content

[@Rikevis10]

Excellent. I shoot both RAW and JPG, but time and storage aren’t really a big concern. However, you’ve given me some things to think about.

[@bujabusiness]

I shoot in JPEG and edit on a tablet. Why, because it's more fun for me. But I also shoot indoors where I control the lighting. I could see the advantages of raw for really bringing up the shadows sutdoors

[@jkingofthechicken2217]

They're both awesome. I shoot for a budget restricted sports League and something they want is (as close to) real time uploads to social media as they can get. I shoot both raw and jpeg. Snapbridge sends 2mp jpegs to my phone which I then periodically check and send. At the end of the day I develop the raws and send those over as well.

[@simon_dentremont]

Excellent setup!

[@bernym4047]

Excellent appraisal of image type choice. I shoot both so that I can quickly prune my shots before editing the raw files I want to keep. Regarding data backups, I used to work in IT and we used to tell customers 'If you don't have three backups, you don't have any' . Back in those days there was no cloud so off site storage of one copy was best practice. Thanks you for another packed video.

[@013Bidou]

Let me start by saying your wildlife photos are absolutely incredible... I'm not a pro (nor is my gear) , i just like nature and love to freeze the moment . I tried shooting in RAW and even RAW and jpeg believing it would give me better end results . But for a few years now i have been using only jpeg because i can barely see the difference and i spent way too much time on software to get the perfect image . And the more you fiddle with those softwares the more you realize there is no perfect image since your output will always be different to what you saw. Now I just spent a little more time on composing ,choosing the best light and settings and getting a result as close as i can to what my eyes perceived. Sometimes i think " if had done this or that i could have made it better " but in the end if all our pictures were perfect, digital photography would become very boring.When i was younger we used to work with a " planche contact" - i don't know what it's called in english ( thumbnail sheet ?)- and i was so happy when 2 or 3 pictures made it trough the way i hoped. But as i said i'm not doing it for work... Really like your tutorials.

[@jonfairriephotography3799]

I recently shot my first football match (Arbroath FC vs Morton) and found that shooting RAW was backing up my buffer too much, switched to JPEG for the second half and it really helped out, so lesson learned!

[@PhilIpp88]

Hi Simon, thanks for the awesome work! What cloud storage subscription service do you use to backup your photos? Greetings from Frankfurt, Germany 😊

[@simon_dentremont]

I'm using SAynology

[@shanewilliams613]

Great video with clear helpful information as always Simon. One very influencing feature to shooting RAW lately is there are great noise reduction programs like DXO Pure RAW that will only process RAW files as well, very valuable for birds and wildlife shooting. Keep up the great work!

[@simon_dentremont]

Agree!

[@barrymayes6712]

Your tutorials are game-changing. Thank you. Ever since I switched from Nikon to Fuji 10 years ago I’ve always used JPEGs. Many photographers laughed at me. I would shoot weddings in JPEG and photographers would laugh at me. I’ve even shot a wedding on my iPhone. I think your advice about algorithms, scene-recognition and psychology of colours sums it up nicely. Those factors explains why I cannot be bothered editing RAW when I know and understand how my FUJI jpegs can handle a scene. Now of course it’s all about HEIF files. I’ve been shooting HEIF on iPhone for several years. Fuji’s top-end cameras now offer HEIF. Also…. Fuji RAW files do not hold detail in highlight areas (unlike Nikon NEF). So Fuji RAW files need to be slightly u see-exposed. That’s no good if if I shoot with Fuji and have RAW in one SD card and JPEG on a second card. So just shoot JPEG and I have learned how to expose properly for a FUJI JPEG; I reduce the highlight setting by a third of a stop in the Q menu. In mega contrast situations I also let the camera increase the dynamic range to ensure I have all tonality in my Fuji JPEGs. Of course! I’m f I increase dynamic range I have to increase my ISO. which brings me neatly back to your excellent advice about using higher ISO. Bravo! Fujifilm JPEGs Forever!!

[@nabuco_audio]

I have just discovered your channel. Your content is great. Straight to the point yet very detailed. Thank you!