DSLRs often have the ability to store both a JPEG and a raw file.
Given that the primary benefit of in-camera JPEG over raw is the smaller filesize, and that JPEG+raw is going to store even more data than raw alone, it seems like you're just wasting space on your card and making your workflow more complicated if you store both.
Why bother storing both JPEG and raw in camera, instead of just a raw file?
Answer
I am an amateur photographer going semi-pro and even though I still only use RAW I have come across a few occasions where RAW+JPEG was needed (or at least would be a great convenience):
- ready to email files (like @rowland-shaw wrote) - some times you need to get your photos out there as fast as possible
- lite photo files to browse through - given that your workflow might include taking a look in your photos from a not-so-capable computer (or other device) before importing them or even during the shoot, it is faster to load a 1.2MB JPEG than a 15MB RAW file
- timelapse - ok, this is an overkill but when shooting timelapse I want to have a bunch of small JPEGs ready to be opened in QuickTime to check the result and then go through the RAWs
In general, JPEGs are for fast preview on other devices (other than your camera) while RAWs are for editing.
No comments:
Post a Comment