RAW versus JPEG

It is generally better to shoot in RAW format rather than JPEG in camera, as RAW files contain more information and allow for greater flexibility in post-processing. RAW files capture all the data from the camera's sensor, while JPEG files discard some of that data during compression.

When shooting in RAW, you have the ability to adjust parameters such as white balance, exposure, contrast, and sharpness after the fact, without losing image quality. This is because RAW files retain all the information captured by the camera's sensor, giving you more latitude to make adjustments in post-processing.

JPEG files, on the other hand, are already processed by the camera and have limited room for adjustments. They are also more prone to artifacts and loss of quality due to compression.

However, shooting in RAW requires more storage space and time to process the files if not shot well. So, if you are shooting in situations where speed is critical or if you are not planning to do any post-processing, shooting in JPEG might be a better option if that extra quality and flexibility of RAW does not make much difference.

Photo - Ozan çulha

RAW and JPEG are two different file formats used in digital photography. As a Photographer, you should have the right information in hand, so that you choose a particular shooting format out of choice rather than just ignorance. You also have the option of shooting on both the formats in one go. Within these formats also you have the choice of keeping the resolution higher or lower in JPEG and in the case of RAW files, you have the option of lossless compression to reduce the file size.

Personally, whatever the situation may be, I shoot at the highest possible resolution on RAW without any compression however lossless it may be. Even if I have shot perfectly, which is the case most of the times, I still keep the option of tweaking my shots if required on the Image processing software open. It keeps things flexible and even if something is not to my liking, I have the flexibility of adjusting the parameters.

Here are some of the pros and cons of both:

RAW format:

Pros:

• Captures all the data from the camera's sensor, providing maximum detail and image quality. The camera anyways captures in RAW and then within itself converts the image to JPEG, leading to the quality loss as the unwanted information is discarded. With all the information retained in the RAW file, you have the scope of improving your images if already shot well and also rescuing your images if you accidentally made a mistake while shooting or the circumstances did not allow you to achieve perfect exposure or white balance.

• The original file remains intact always and even after making adjustments, you can go back to the setting you originally kept on your camera. This is a very helpful feature and sometimes, even after years you plan to treat the same image differently and it's possible because all the information is retained in the file. In eralier time, when shooting on the film, the whole process was a physical and a chemical process. The image was formed on the light sensitive film, negative or transparency, whatever the case may be. There was a very limited scope of making some adjustments in the darkroom. But in the case of Digital Photography, the camera is forming the image on the sensor but this is a temporary one in the form of the information that the scene contains. This information is interpretated by the particula brand and model of the camera in its own way. besides what is interpreted as the most suitable information to form the image, further information is also collected and store in the file itself. On the Image processing software, you have the option of exploiting this information and make changes to the way the image was originally shot and perceived. This is to a very large extent without any quality loss as such. For example, completely changing the white balance is possible in a RAW file and this is absolutely without any loss.

• Offers greater flexibility in post-processing, allowing you to adjust parameters such as white balance, exposure, contrast, and sharpness without losing image quality. I always use the camera's own software as I feel the brand understands its own equipment, technology and the science involved better as compared to a third party with whom the brand generally shares

  all such information to develop the required software. It may also be debated that the camera manufacturers are better at making the cameras as compared to the Image processing softwares and the companies specilising in such softwares do it better. Lightroom is very popular software but i have been using Digital Photo profesional for all canon images and Capture one for all Phase one images.

• Provides a wide dynamic range, allowing you to recover details in highlights and shadows. Since the file contains a wider range of information, you can achieve images with higher dynamic range through the camera's own Image processing software or a third-party application

• .

• Offers the ability to change the color space and bit depth in post-processing, which is particularly useful in professional printing. Contrary to the common belief, I always keep my color space as Adobe RGB and not sRGB. Adobe RGB has a wider color gamut as compared to sRGB. Over the years with the advancements in overall digital technology, there has a been a drastic improvement in our screens as compared to the printing. The wider range of colours in a Bigger colour gamut are clearly visible when displayed ona good screen. Bit depth also should be highest you camera can shoot on.

• Provides the ability to create HDR and panorama images with greater ease. Whenever I shoot HDR images on the camera, I retain the original RAW files and do not discard them. The camera creates a final HDR JPEG file but I create a new file on the Image processing software to have a better control over the look of the final image, ensuring that it does not look artificial. Previewing on a larger monitor helps fine-tune the final outcome.

• Better JPEG files even when straight away converted from RAW to JPEG on a good image processing software as compared to the ones made within the camera. Of course these things keep changing with technology and the same can be tested for the equipment you own.

Cons:

• Requires more storage space and time to process the files. True, but then that's the price one has to pay for quality.

• May require additional software or plugins to work with. The RAW files won't show by themselves unless the operating system, be it of a computer or a mobile phone, supports it. So, it is definitely not universal in nature. But RAW as mentioned earlier, is a good starting point behind the scenes to achieve better viewable JPEGS.

• Requires more knowledge and skill in post-processing to get the best results. Not always. Because if you have shot well to begin with, you still get a technically superior image as compared to JPEG.

JPEG format:

Pros:

• Smaller file size, which allows for more photos to be stored on a memory card or hard drive.

• Quicker and easier to share or print without additional processing. These can be immediately shared with Non-photographers or non-technical people who are not aware of RAW format. Otherwise, even if you do not intend to make any changes in the images, you still have to convert them into JPEG files so that these can be shared. This, even if done as a batch process in one go, is time-consuming and definitely not instant.

• Requires less knowledge and skill because no post-processing is involved. Even if the images need to be just converted without any changes or enhancements, you still need to be aware of good image processing software.

• 
  

Cons:

• Lossy compression can result in loss of detail and image quality. This is more evident in case of enlargments and often goes as less noticeable in case of small mobile phone screens. But it's always best to shoot on the largest possible quality and then reduce the size. As technology improves, such things get outdated fast and its always best to stay future-ready.

• Offers limited flexibility in post-processing, as adjustments can introduce artifacts and further reduce image quality. The very starting point of a JPEG file is reduced file size for sharing. That's the main objective. If you try making changes on these files in Photoshop or any other such software, there is a quality loss every time the image is saved. If you notice, there is a dialogue box which asks for the image quality. If you accidentally save it on a lower quality, there is irreversible quality loss in the file and you cant get back to the original file quality.

• Provides a limited dynamic range, making it difficult to recover details in highlights and shadows.

• Color space and bit depth are fixed, limiting the range of adjustments that can be made.

• So, even if you decide to shoot on JPEG, make sure that you are shooting on the highest setting your camera offers for JPEG. Further, if you work on the computer on these files, convert them to TIFF or PSD first. Once you have finished working, save them back as JPEG at the last stage for sharing.

• You can also explore the option of shooting on both RAW and JPEG together in case you intend to share the images straight out of the camera without any delay. This ensures that you are still safe if you made any mistakes while shooting and you have the scope of enhancing your images later on if not immediately.

  
  

In summary, RAW offers greater flexibility and image quality, but requires more storage space and time to process the files which should never be a problem if you are a professional or a serious Photographer. JPEG is quicker and easier to share or print, but offers less flexibility and image quality. The choice between the two ultimately depends on your specific needs and workflow.

I always shoot in RAW, make corrections wherever required and convert them to JPEG for distribution. If any of the images need some work in Photoshop, these are converted to a higher bit TIFF. Any adjustments which are manipulative in nature should be done on a TIFF or PSD file instead of a JPEG so that we do not end up savinga JPEG file and hence compressing the file again and again.

Notice that almost all the controls that you have in the camera are available in the RAW converting software as well, allowing you much finer control at a later stage after clicking the photograph in the RAW format. You can make finer adjustments while previwing the image on a large computer screen as compared to a smaller screen of your camera.

It's good to know that shooting RAW is not restricted to Photography only but is an integral part of Cinematography as well. All professional filmmaking involves shooting on the "RAW" mode specific to the video settings of the camera. These are called LOGS and every brand has a specific name for these. For example, Canon calls it C log where as Sony calls it S log. There are various LUTS that can be applied to such footage. LUTS are Recipies in simple words. But you have to option of individually adjusting the parameters as per the preceived look of the final film. All this is time-consuming and again, if you have shot well and already like the look of the scene aided by your lighting and other characteristics, you may shoot conventionally to have the final footage straight out of the camera. I often shoot a part of the video conventionally to have a reference point for post processing of the RAW footage shot on C or S LOG. Since I always set things right to begin with this helps me reduce the time consumed at the later stage. Essentially, it means the same that all the main information, including a higher BIT Depth is retained in the original data so that there is much more control while editing the footage in the ediing software, be it Adobe Premiere or Black Magic or Final cut pro.