I am curious if anyone has any comments on shooting photographs in both jpeg and raw. Are there disadvantages to shooting in RAW?
I had banding issues(alternating red/green lines) while processing an image with a quick change from dark to light(back lit storm). I had this with an 8 bit tiff from raw conversion(8 bit jpg won't be any better). I started processing in 16 bit(impossible with a jpg) from my raw file and it went bye bye. You can make a jpg from a raw, you can't ever make a raw from a jpg. I see no reason not to shoot in raw. As for file size, I don't think a fine(high quality setting) jpg is much smaller than the raw file would be. Large capacity compact flash cars are getting cheaper and cheaper, as is storage in general. Go with RAW.— Possibly the biggest advantage of shooting raw is that one has a 16 bit image (post raw conversion) to work with. This means that the file has 65,536 levels to work with. This is opposed to a JPG file's 8 bit space with just 256 brightness levels available. This is important when editing an image, particularly if one is trying to open up shadows or alter brightness in any significant way.
As for file size, I don't think a fine(high quality setting) jpg is much smaller than the raw file would be.
Correct me if I am wrong, but many short time frame journalists shoot in jpeg.
Thanks. That is what I figured. At least in RAW I can actually see what different K Temp settings look like. That gives me some idea what to set the camera at. It seems like there is so much to learn. I don't have time to take classes right now (but would like to do that). Trying to learn from trial and error...and reading some books.All the same things you should if you weren't.