Downsides to shooting in Raw?

Good morning.  I'm new here.  I tried finding an exact answer and did find anything and was wondering for those who have been shooting in JPEG format and want to change to shooting in RAW.  What are the downsides to RAW?

From what I'm seeing, it's just a little performance because the RAW files are larger?  So it will use up more of the cameras buffer as it processes.  Is that correct? 

That, and you will need a fairly decent photo editor to take proper advantage of the potential of RAW.  The typical freebie editors and those supplied with new cameras do not accomplish this.  With an exception for Canon's Digital Photo Professional, which is a good transition editor for those on their way to Lightroom.

Kelly Cook

Why not just shoot in dual format? I shoot in RAW+Jpeg Fine all the time. The camera clears the buffer just fine when doing so. To me it is having the best of both worlds. I tweak the settings in my Picture Controls to pre-process my Jpegs for effect, and sometimes play with my RAW files to see what I can get out of them differently. I have learned what my camera does with the PC settings, and usually only do minor tweaks at times, in photoshop. For processing your RAWs you can use Nikon Transfer as well, though it is really only good for minor work, to get the most out there are other programs for that.

Once you have the hang of processing RAW in eg. Photoshop or Lightroom,  you will never shoot jpg again, unless you are in a huge hurry and need the shots fast.

Hassner wrote: Once you have the hang of processing RAW in eg. Photoshop or Lightroom,  you will never shoot jpg again, unless you are in a huge hurry and need the shots fast.

Bingo. There are no downsides to raw format. Photoshop comes with ACR, and learning post processing is as important as learning the camera controls. The file sizes are bigger but digital storage is cheap, and getting "more affordable" by the day....

Randall McNabb wrote: Good morning.  I'm new here.  I tried finding an exact answer and did find anything and was wondering for those who have been shooting in JPEG format and want to change to shooting in RAW.  What are the downsides to RAW?

From what I'm seeing, it's just a little performance because the RAW files are larger?  So it will use up more of the cameras buffer as it processes.  Is that correct? 

There is no downside, unless you consider having to actually create an image that fulfills your artistic vision, as opposed to letting the camera's software do it, a downside.

You will have to learn to post process your images. It will take time, and work, and patience. But there are infinite possibilities when you start with a lump of clay.

Hassner wrote: Once you have the hang of processing RAW in eg. Photoshop or Lightroom,  you will never shoot jpg again, unless you are in a huge hurry and need the shots fast.

I couldn't agree more.  Actually I can't remember the last time I shot in JPG.  

effron wrote:

Hassner wrote: Once you have the hang of processing RAW in eg. Photoshop or Lightroom,  you will never shoot jpg again, unless you are in a huge hurry and need the shots fast.

Bingo. There are no downsides to raw format. Photoshop comes with ACR, and learning post processing is as important as learning the camera controls. The file sizes are bigger but digital storage is cheap, and getting "more affordable" by the day....

+1 Agree

You can't just email the file to someone and expect them to be able to use it. Jpegs are good for that, if you just want to send something to someone quickly.

But if that's the case, most of the time I'll just use my phone.

Sports/News photographers might be a different story.

My wife reminds me of that every time she wants to get into the photos I have taken.  

Shooting in RAW + JPG means you can quickly send someone a jpg to see what they think.

I prefer JPG as I want the photo to look the same as when I took it but then I like my photos to be either over or under exposed and looking a bit different.

I see no downside to RAW.  If I want to send a picture to someone, I just do a quick convert in Light Room.  Raw give so much more to work with.

Joves wrote: Why not just shoot in dual format? I shoot in RAW+Jpeg Fine all the time. The camera clears the buffer just fine when doing so. To me it is having the best of both worlds. I tweak the settings in my Picture Controls to pre-process my Jpegs for effect, and sometimes play with my RAW files to see what I can get out of them differently. I have learned what my camera does with the PC settings, and usually only do minor tweaks at times, in photoshop. For processing your RAWs you can use Nikon Transfer as well, though it is really only good for minor work, to get the most out there are other programs for that.

I often use the jpegs to pre-select photo for further processing, then work on the RAW files.

Baydream wrote:

Joves wrote: Why not just shoot in dual format? I shoot in RAW+Jpeg Fine all the time. The camera clears the buffer just fine when doing so. To me it is having the best of both worlds. I tweak the settings in my Picture Controls to pre-process my Jpegs for effect, and sometimes play with my RAW files to see what I can get out of them differently. I have learned what my camera does with the PC settings, and usually only do minor tweaks at times, in photoshop. For processing your RAWs you can use Nikon Transfer as well, though it is really only good for minor work, to get the most out there are other programs for that.

I often use the jpegs to pre-select photo for further processing, then work on the RAW files.

Exactly John. Jpegs just like anything else are just tools that aid you in getting what you want. Also if your Jpeg turns out as you wanted, you can just hit the apply as shot in the RAW processor, and do any minor tweaks to the RAW file. Then you can convert it to any of the larger formats for other purposes. Far too many just blow off using Jpeg in my opinion, and as I have stated I try to get it right when shot, and the Jpeg is the direct result of how I set the camera to get it. I processed the image, but I tried to get the processing done before I shot it.

From my part, the only downside is the file size.

Of course if you don't like / don't have time to process the photo, just use JPEG (or JPEG + RAW) until you are ready to shot RAW.