If an image is blown out I do not bother trying to glean details out of the blown highlight, I just throw it away, the images are for personal use so it does not matter.īut, when I shot real Estate and a few weddings for a couple of years, I used Raw, as there 'may' be a shot taken that is important but badly exposed. Why bother to take a raw and try to get it to match the camera film simulation when the camera does a better job (in my opinion and my skills). I found that for most of my pics, a Jpeg is just fine as I just crop, straighten, apply a little enhancement and that's itĪlso I now shoot Fuji, and they have film simulations built into the camera. I display mine on a 55inch TV or upload on the web, occasionaly I print. Personally I do not like spending hours on an image to try and get the best out of it.

If you want them for displaying on the web, (facebook, intsagram etc) then they will only be stored online as a poor quality, so Jpeg will be fine.

If you blow them up large, or crop heavily or want the best quality then Raw all the way. It also depends on what you want to do with your images. However, until you learn how to process raw, you may find that the camera Jpegs look better. So, if you are good at image manipulation and the time (or are willing to learn) then Raw is the best. All the extra data has been thrown away, and it is compressed down as well so more details is lost Now that's a good question that only you can answerĮffectively RAW is a negative, it contains all the sensor data and there is more leeway when you develop it to the image you want, for example, there may be some more details in the highlights that you can squeeze out.Ī Jpeg is the developed image.

Darktable black and white pictures