User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  9
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Are just jpegs OK?

  1. #1
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    14,833
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Are just jpegs OK?

    Mainly for the pros, but not only:
    What is the place of "jpegs only" (I mean, not even jpg+raw) at functions such as weddings and big parties, where you might take about 500 or so pics?

    (My own idea: maybe for the candids at the receptions? And I mean maybe.)

    Is there any justification for this approach?

    Am.
    CC, Image editing OK.

  2. #2
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,864
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ameerat42 View Post
    Is there any justification for this approach?
    No, choose your poison as far as memory card format is concerned but whatever it is they are very very cheap in this day and age so the "argument" about file size is lost right there and then.

    Your idea of maybe for the candids at a reception doesn't fly with me any more than a lead balloon because I consider all or indeed any photos taken at such an event to have equal value so they should all be captured at the highest quality level available.
    Andrew
    Nikon, Fuji, Nikkor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and too many other bits and pieces to list.



  3. #3
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,701
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In an environment where speed of getting the images to the client, nothing really makes sense other than raw!

    The only reason I could see for the use of jpg only mode, is for the speed of getting images to the customer/publisher/press/etc.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  4. #4
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular
    Threadstarter
    ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    14,833
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by I @ M View Post
    No, choose your poison as far as memory card format is concerned but whatever it is they are very very cheap in this day and age so the "argument" about file size is lost right there and then.

    Your idea of maybe for the candids at a reception doesn't fly with me any more than a lead balloon because I consider all or indeed any photos taken at such an event to have equal value so they should all be captured at the highest quality level available.
    I must hasten to point out that the only part of the idea that I can own is the heavily qualified one in the original post. I put forward no other arguments about the idea.

    Quote Originally Posted by arthurking83 View Post
    In an environment where speed of getting the images to the client, nothing really makes sense other than raw!

    The only reason I could see for the use of jpg only mode, is for the speed of getting images to the customer/publisher/press/etc.
    Thanks Andrew and AK.

    Am.
    Last edited by ameerat42; 02-10-2012 at 8:33am.

  5. #5
    Sir Rattus79 - The Proclaimant
    Join Date
    15 Jul 2010
    Location
    Forest Lake
    Posts
    1,948
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I only use Jpg when I'm going to be using some one elses pc, like for friends at a party or a motorcross outing.
    Greg Bartle,
    I have a Pentax and I'm not afraid to use it.
    Pentax K5
    Sigma 10-20 | Tamron 17-50 F:2.8 | Sigma 50 F:1.4 | Sigma 70-200 F:2.8 Plus a bunch of Ye Olde lenses


    Would you like to see more?
    http://flickr.com/photosbygreg

  6. #6
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,132
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    JPG has its place when the photographer understands both RAW and JPG and therefore the compression/limitations of JPG. Until you know the benefits/limitations of anything, I would suggest their use is compromised. Shooting RAW can be a limitation if the photographer has no understanding of RAW.

    If you fully understand how JPG compression etc is going to affect the result, and you are happy to accept that, use JPG for any situations you wish to.
    Last edited by ricktas; 02-10-2012 at 9:56am.
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  7. #7
    Ausphotography Regular swifty's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 May 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,352
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As others have noted, when speed is of the essence then jpegs may indeed have an advantage.
    Cost of storage may be low but wireless bandwidth's still catching up.
    I can imagine a fair few sports images for web publishing are jpegs.
    The photographers may be shooting RAW+ jpegs, I'm not sure, and perhaps reworking those RAWs later for print publishing?
    Nikon FX

  8. #8
    Amor fati! ving's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Jun 2007
    Location
    St Helens Park
    Posts
    7,275
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    cameras will often shoot at a faster fps in jpg mode. also the buffer doesnt get used up as fast so it'll shoot more frames in continuous mode
    Last edited by ving; 02-10-2012 at 11:57am.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Mar 2012
    Location
    Flinders View
    Posts
    435
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Are just jpegs OK?

    I was told on another Aussie tog forum, quite harshly I might add, that most if not all sports togs use purely jpeg. Speed and having no use for the RAW editing capabilities being the main reason. Personally, I shoot RAW.
    Cheers,
    Ian

    All the 7's: D700, D7000, D70

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Nope, dont do jpegs, especially at weddings where lighting is a pain sometimes. Its not just about lighting, but the total control I have with a RAW file later.

    I only take less than a week to edit a full wedding from myself and my 2nd shooter - processing and editing RAWs, and I believe in quality for the end product. Having less controls in the PP for jpegs does not lead to a quality end product.
    Commercial/Editorial/Wedding work - www.jackietranphoto.com
    Travel Photography - www.wanderingasianguy.com

    Broncolor lights up my world.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2010
    Location
    Doreen
    Posts
    332
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I shoot mostly jpg+RAW. The jpegs speed my workflow and allow me to get them to the client quickly. The RAW acts as cheap insurance in case I need further headroom in post. There's no right or wrong, but this approach works for me.
    Please don't hesitate to provide me with CC! I'd love to hear your thoughts regarding any of my images. Thanks!

  12. #12
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular
    Threadstarter
    ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    14,833
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ta to everyone for your responses. I have recently had reason to consider this question when talking to a professional photographer.
    I will only say that our discussion left me surprised at first, as it challenged some ideas of my own. On the other hand, he had evidence to support his point of view.
    It took me a while to make up the question for this thread (and I hope it's not too far off). Also, I did not want to make a poll out of it as I felt it had the potential to make the replies
    rather too polarised for any useful discussion.

    If anything, it's shown me that more things are possible than I might routinely think.

    Personally, I like using raw for their potential, and also because in working them, it makes [me/you/the photographer/OK a passer by] think more about the image taken.

    Again, thanks to all for your responses and I look forward to any more.
    Am.

  13. #13
    Member bconolly's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Sep 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Am, I use both. Raw for later processing (typically much heavier editing) and Jpegs for quickly posting to blogs, Facebook etc when out and about and don't want to / have time to pfaff about with editing.

    BC
    Olympus OM-D EM-1, 12-40mm f2.8, 45mm f1.8, Panny 25mm f1.7

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2010
    Location
    Doreen
    Posts
    332
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Eberbachl View Post
    I shoot mostly jpg+RAW. The jpegs speed my workflow and allow me to get them to the client quickly. The RAW acts as cheap insurance in case I need further headroom in post. There's no right or wrong, but this approach works for me.

    Coincidentally, whilst I don't often need to do it I had occassion to refer to a RAW file tonight, and it saved the image for me.

    99% jpeg is just fine for my work, but when I need RAW I appreciate it.


  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    05 Jun 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    421
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use to use jpeg when I first started out ten months ago, which was fine however as time went on and I explored what raw did I jumped onto the raw train quickly. I haven't used jpeg since no matter the amount of photos I take.

    As for the comment regarding candid shots at weddings and deeming them not as important as staged shots, which I feel you are inferring by asking if it is fine to just use jpeg for candid yet keep using raw for 'quality shots', is a mistake in itself. I have shot a handful of Weddings now and have quickly tacked onto the idea the candids are actually the shots people love and end up throwing on their walls instead of static photos. I remember a number of times now I would have to shoot grumpy couples with a troublesome child and they didn't want a family shot, so I would wait throughout the night and check on them, sure enough I would capture a candid of the three of them with nothing but smiles and being together with either parent holding onto their child. The reaction usually is with those photos, "Wow, when did you get that!?". Don't underestimate candids for Weddings and events! In fact, they are a vital component of that kind of photography I feel.

  16. #16
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,132
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AVALANCHE View Post
    I use to use jpeg when I first started out ten months ago, which was fine however as time went on and I explored what raw did I jumped onto the raw train quickly. I haven't used jpeg since no matter the amount of photos I take.

    As for the comment regarding candid shots at weddings and deeming them not as important as staged shots, which I feel you are inferring by asking if it is fine to just use jpeg for candid yet keep using raw for 'quality shots', is a mistake in itself. I have shot a handful of Weddings now and have quickly tacked onto the idea the candids are actually the shots people love and end up throwing on their walls instead of static photos. I remember a number of times now I would have to shoot grumpy couples with a troublesome child and they didn't want a family shot, so I would wait throughout the night and check on them, sure enough I would capture a candid of the three of them with nothing but smiles and being together with either parent holding onto their child. The reaction usually is with those photos, "Wow, when did you get that!?". Don't underestimate candids for Weddings and events! In fact, they are a vital component of that kind of photography I feel.
    I am confused? Are you trying to say you should choose RAW for the official stuff and JPG for the candids here? I cannot work out what you post has to do with the original question. This thread is about the benefits/disadvantages of shooting RAW and/or JPG, not about shooting candids at a wedding

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    27 Sep 2007
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sports shooters that are working from my experience shot jpeg. They tend to shot 1000's of shots in a day and have to meat very tight deadlines.
    Thanks Steve
    Winer of the sheep week 2 + 6
    www.atkimages.com.au "If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough," ROBERT CAPA"
    Tokina 16-28 f2.8 PRO FX,Sigma 500 4.5 Ex DG, Canon 5D Mii, Canon 7D, Canon 2x converter,Canon 70-200 2.8 L,
    Sigma 120-300 2.8 EX, Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX, Canon 1.4x converter, Canon 580 ex 2 speed light
    And two canon kit Lenses.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,837
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Besides what Steve said, often sport you are shooting outdoors in sun, so really if you are pro should nail the exposure and white balance so you should not need to do any, let alone extensive, post processing and with 1000's of shots really you dont want to either
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    05 Jun 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    421
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ricktas View Post
    I am confused? Are you trying to say you should choose RAW for the official stuff and JPG for the candids here? I cannot work out what you post has to do with the original question. This thread is about the benefits/disadvantages of shooting RAW and/or JPG, not about shooting candids at a wedding
    Yes, this thread is about the pros/cons of jpeg and raw, and OP was using Weddings as an example of such shooting.

    He then wanted to know the place of jpeg shooting for a Wedding and suggested candids at the reception, which inferred in my mind that he might not consider candid shots as important as his other shots if switching from raw to jpeg for them, though as you can see above I feel it is important, so the point of my post was to stay in raw when shooting at weddings, unless of course you dont understand/appreciate what it can do, so in that case, one would stay in jpeg the whole time for sanitys sake when it comes to uploading them.

  20. #20
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular
    Threadstarter
    ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    14,833
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AVALANCHE View Post
    Yes, this thread is about the pros/cons of jpeg and raw, and OP was using Weddings as an example of such shooting.

    He then wanted to know the place of jpeg shooting for a Wedding and suggested candids at the reception, which inferred in my mind that he might not consider candid shots as important as his other shots if switching from raw to jpeg for them, though as you can see above I feel it is important, so the point of my post was to stay in raw when shooting at weddings, unless of course you dont understand/appreciate what it can do, so in that case, one would stay in jpeg the whole time for sanitys sake when it comes to uploading them.
    Oh Avalanche! So did I utterly fail to convey my meaning again? Oh well, here goes.

    Every now and then a thread comes up specifically asking the benefits of shooting jpgs vs raw.
    This thread is NOT one of those. It sort of assumes - you see I said, "Mainly for the pros..." That meant such as wedding photographers - that they are not the only people who understand both file formats.

    Instead, it is about whether there are ANY MERITS in shooting the likes of a wedding - or pick any other event where the potential to generate masses of images is high - using jpeg instead of raw, given that you know about both.

    Since I took the example of a wedding, with the attendant reception as the likely high-volume-image-generator, I then offered as a "start-off" the possibility that, if anywhen, there would be the place that perhaps it might "do". Noticed I wrapped it fairly snugly in a "maybe" qualifying blanket.

    But, from that opening post, you cannot infer that it is my predilection to do so. Cripes! I do not even photograph people! But you wouldn't have known that.

    OK, so from your reply I know you think there is no place at weddings, at least, for a professional photographer to shoot jpegs only.
    Ta, Am.
    Last edited by ameerat42; 04-10-2012 at 7:28am.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •