If i shoot RAW and i convert it to jpeg, is it worth it?

Question: If i shoot RAW and i convert it to jpeg, is it worth it!?

If i shoot jpg don't i lose information and quality either way!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

It's ultimately your decision!.

If you shoot JPEG the RAW data is processed and compressed in-camera taking into account some of your choice settings (i!.e!. contrast, sharpening, saturation, etc!.)!. Once this is complete, the RAW data is then discarded and you're left with what the camera thinks is what you want!. The results differ from camera to camera and it's acceptable most of the time for some people!. However, when you shoot JPEG and the results are not good there's little you can do!. Pentax's K10D/K100D, for example, is capable of producing sharp photos but because of poor in-camera processing, its RAWs are much sharper than its JPEGs!. [1]

Shooting RAW will give you the ability to apply your own level of adjustments!. Like Nathan said above: there is an amount of work that needs to be done to RAW files!. But as you get familiar with your camera you'll start to see patterns!. When you do and take note of these patterns, batch processing will make things real easy!. Since RAW processing is non-destructive (adjustments are always applied on top of the file, never on the file) there's a finer level of flexability!. You can change radically incorrect white balance, recover highlights, adjust exposures, and much more with little or no degradation!. When you convert a RAW file, you also have finer control over the compression options!.

It's really not the same thing!. If absolute quality is important to you: RAW is the best cow to milk!. If smaller files, convenience, and generally acceptable quality is what you're looking for: JPEG's the way to go!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Shoot raw and convert it to Tiff or PSD!. Raw gives you much greater flexibility, and also even if you do still convert it to jpeg on your computer the quality may be better as you can edit before conversion, and also the computing power of your pc is much greater so may give a better outputWww@QuestionHome@Com

When you shoot in RAW, it's more inconvenient in general, Because they require color edited at so forth!. You get a better quality image, but you have to edit it, and correct the colors with a software like photoshop, so you can't just say take a picture and then print it!.

JPEG is much more convenient, you can just print the pictures and you don't have to worry about the quality, and the image is going to look fine, RAW just gives you more quality, but you need so much edited!.

So, if you like to spend time editing and correcting, you should shoot in the RAW format, but if you're all about simplicity, you should just stick with JPEGWww@QuestionHome@Com

It's worth it because of the greater latitude you have in processing the image!. also consider that you don't have to convert to jpg!. There are choices for final file format!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

You can't print RAW, you have to convert it and regardless of what you convert it to, you will lose about 10-15% of the information on your image!.Www@QuestionHome@Com