What do you shoot?

so you edit all 304 images you have shot & then what? keep them all?

sounds like hard work to me....

I shoot RAW because it allows me to mess-up now and again and rescue something from the ashes. In controlled circumstances or for people who are very experienced and adept at getting the image close to perfect in camera, jpegs can, clearly, be all that is needed.

I made the transition from jpg to RAW when I discovered Lightroom. I am, most of the time, unaware that I am doing anything very different to what I was doing with jpgs previously.

Like so many things, as long as whatever you are doing works for you, then carry on doing it! If John R will excuse me using him as an example, I can often spot his photos because of the technical quality and competence they exhibit, and John shoots jpegs.

My biggest concern at the moment is that all my RAW images are held as PEFs with xml sidebar files from Lightroom. This is not a viable long term archiving strategy and I really need to convert them to DNGs. It'll be a big job!

Best wishes and happy snapping, K.
K.

I'm using RAW 99% of the time. Used to go for jpegs out of my K10 when buffer speed was an issue shooting an action stuff. But the K-7 is loads better in that respect and I don't think I've shot a single jpeg with it out of 8000+ images (and counting).

For landscape and any slower, more considered work, I've being working really hard on following 'expose to the right' techniques to maxmimise the lattitude I have to play with in LR. Out of the camera like that they can look down-right awful but with a few tweaks I'm getting results that I'm pleased with and shots that have a nice 'zing' about them!

Must get round to posting some recent examples - have chopped down over a 1000 shots from a 5 day trip to the lakes to around 70 or 80 that warrant doing some more serious PP'ing with.

RAW used to be more difficult to deal with in the early days, when software was rather rough and ready. But now, it's really no big deal. As Womble says, the advantage of RAW is that it allows you to screw up a bit, and still have a picture to show for it.

As I've pointed out before, the real pros use JPEG, because they never screw up.

I shoot RAW.

G

what do you do with your photos, make them and throw them away?

I don't edit them all some get throw away right away and some are kept stored without processing.
Like said i try to batch process most of them so even not the good ones get an edit if there is a good one which have the same lighting condition.

Lightroom does all the organizing and RAW processing, it does work really fast and easy.
I spend more time editing the best shots in photoshop for output.

If we didn't had computers I would probably spend most of my time in the darkroom, it's just another side of photography really.

I always shoot Raw. It gives more options when processing,for example using plug-ins. Also I find aerial shots need a lot of work on levels, the histogram is very narrow when it is bright and hazy, so jpeg is not really an option for those.

RAW+JPG for me.

Although I process 99% of my shots from the K10D and K20D from the RAW file, I appreciate having a JPG there too for reference so I know what shot is what (I don't have Lightroom - got put off with LR 1.1, but I hear LR3 is so much better.)

Occasionally there may be a jpg (the other 1%) that the camera has processed that I like and will use that instead.

Plus from time to time like the recent Romiley Horse show, they only wanted JPG's there and then so RAW files would be useless.

Yes, it fills up cards and hard drives, but memory is cheap these days.