RAW vs JPG: The Truth About Big Photography Format Myths

RAW vs. JPG, Truth vs. Myth

When it comes to digital photography, the format in which your camera saves your photos can have a significant impact on your images. That said, there are a lot of opinions and one big myth surrounding the RAW vs. JPG format debate. In reality there shouldn't even be a debate. This is because both the RAW and JPG formats serve specific purposes.

These two formats each have their own strengths and weaknesses. Which you choose should depend on what you're taking photos of, what you plan to do with the photos, and how quickly or thoroughly you need them to be edited. Too, it is perfectly acceptable to switch between the two formats based on these needs.

First, let's understand what we're talking about when we say RAW vs. JPG.

RAW Format

RAW is an uncompressed file format that captures all the data from your camera's sensor. It provides the highest level of image quality and allows for greater flexibility in post-processing. RAW files retain the original data. This includes details in shadows and highlights. As a result, you're given more control over adjustments such as exposure, white balance, and color grading. However, RAW files require software to view and edit. Plus, they take up more storage space compared to JPGs.

JPG Format

JPG, on the other hand, is a compressed file format that applies in-camera processing to the image. It results in smaller file sizes, making it more convenient for sharing and storing photos. JPGs are ready to use straight out of the camera. They do not require any additional processing. However, the compression discards some image data, leading to some loss in quality. This loss is often negligible, especially when shooting in good lighting conditions or for casual photography. That said, once your image is saved in the camera that additional data is gone.

RAW vs. JPG Myths

There are a lot of myths out there when it comes to RAW vs. JPG. Most of these myths have more to do with preference and arrogance. The truth is that JPG is a perfectly reasonable format to use assuming that it fits your needs.

The biggest myth is that RAW is simply a "better" format because it contains more data. More is not always better. Of course, if you need that additional data then it is. However, if you don't need it then you're just wasting space.

Buffer The Action Photo Slayer

One area where JPG is superior to RAW is when it comes to burst mode. RAW photos will reach your card or camera's buffer limit faster than JPG. If you run into your buffer it doesn't matter how much more data RAW files have. Not being able to take more photos until the buffer clears can be costly.

Choosing the Right Format

So, when should you choose RAW over JPG? If you are a professional photographer or someone who wants maximum control over the editing process, shooting in RAW is usually the way to go. That said, for projects that require immediate delivery, such as photojournalism, you might not have the time to capture RAW photos, edit, and convert them.

RAW files allow for extensive adjustments without sacrificing image quality. On the other hand, if you are a casual photographer, shooting in JPG can save you time and storage space, especially when the final output is intended for online sharing or small prints.

When To Use RAW

It makes sense to use RAW when the tonal range of your photos will be quite large. Check out my article on "the Punxsutawney Rule" to understand how to read tonal contrast like a professional photographer. For landscape photos it makes a lot of sense to use RAW. After all, you want to be able to make a lot of adjustments to get landscape photos just right. The same is true when it comes to low-light situations.

When To Use JPG

Aside from photojournalism, and especially sports, you might choose to use JPG for a number of other reasons. First, JPG is a great format if you're taking a ton of photos and don't have the room or extra cards needed to save RAW files.

For example, I photographed a three-day hockey tournament this past weekend. I needed to turn around the photos the same day so parents could buy copies. I'm scheduled to photograph a development soccer team in the Spring. The players are being scouted so it's important that they have photos to immediately post on social media.

JPG isn't just a great choice when you need a quick turn-around. It's also a perfectly reasonable format to use when you don't need to do any post production editing. If you're controlling your lighting, for example, when taking portraits, you might choose to save your photos as JPGs.

As long as the light is good, the tonal contrast isn't out of your control, and you're not doing extensive editing there's nothing wrong with choosing JPG over RAW.

Switching Between Formats

It is important to note that you can switch between RAW and JPG formats as needed. Too, many cameras offer the option to shoot in both formats simultaneously. This flexibility allows you to choose the most suitable format for each shot.

Also, it allows you to have the best of both worlds, capturing RAW files for critical shots that require extensive editing and shooting JPGs for everyday moments. Just be aware that capturing both can cut into the capacity of your storage including the cards in your camera.

In Conclusion

Understanding the real differences between RAW and JPG formats empowers photographers to make informed decisions based on specific needs. Whether you prioritize maximum image quality and editing flexibility or convenience and efficiency, both formats have their place in the world of photography. So, don't be afraid to experiment, switch between the two, and find what works best for you.