What format do you shoot and why? I’d love to know!

I would love a video on astrophotography!

Simon - You are an excellent photographer, but you are an even better communicator/teacher. I get burnt out pretty fast by most of these “experts.” Not so with you. You get right to the point, there is no superfluous information and you cover a huge amount of information in a reasonable time. Keep up the good work. Thanks.

Simon is the definition of a great teacher. You're a master.

I love that you just come out and say if you prefer jpeg just use it. As a new to the hobby wildlife and astrophotography I have yet to dive deep into lightroom. I plan to but right now I am enjoying learning the changes between aperture, shutter speed, and ISO while shooting in jpeg.

Astrophotography with telescope: YES YES YES!!!! I need this video!!!

I conducted my own RAW-cRAW-jpg tests a few years ago when Canon introduced cRAW. There is no discernible difference 99.9% of the time. But, even though storage is cheap, the big advantage to cRAW is faster camera and computer processing. The camera works better (faster) with cRAW files and download/processing times are cut in half. Smart move going to cRAW-I’ve been preaching it to my fellow photographers for years.

Great title LOL! As a casual photographer I do mild editing so I shoot jpeg. I've never turned it into a demanding career so I never needed it. Your lessons have improved my digital photography that I frame as gifts for friends and family 16x20 max and they look great. It makes me happy to share my art as you share your knowledge. Thank you Simon

You said "Andromeda Galaxy" and I was expecting a speck of some kind. The image that popped up was spectacular!!! Blew my mind!!

Currently shoot RAW for post processing. Why buy a really nice camera that captures all that data and then throw most of it away...so JPEG was never an option for me, but I will now consider Compressed RAW. I'm not as much worried about file size as I am with the camera's data processing speed so CRAW may be the way to go. If I want a quick snap for myself or social media, I use my phone. Thanks for another great video Simon!

Yep!! I shoot Jpeg too. I buy a camera to shoot scenes and other subjects, NOT to sit in front of a PC endlessly worrying about what FroPack LightRoom enhancement I should use on each and every shot. Cheers

One of the most useful photography channels without noise .

As an amateur, I make mistakes. RAW can and has saved my butt plenty of times. I like to shoot RAW+JPEG so I have the RAW for editing and a JPEG to see what the camera cooked and a fast method of sharing before looking at the RAWs. I'd use CRAW if I could, the file size is huge but the flexibility of RAW makes it worth it.

Gosh I’m glad this guy exists. I’m learning so much with every video. I can’t wait to try this experiment out. I’ve got so many raws stashed away that I never touch but was too afraid not to have.

RAW + JPG always. This way I'm always covered for all situations and I don't need to waste a moment thinking about it. RAW for greater range / color / quality. JPG goes to secondary card for backup, and shoot & share days (family outings to quickly post, etc.). You never know when a portfolio image or wall-hanger will happen, definitely want a RAW "negative" for them. But also overall, my RAW files just look and edit so much nicer. In my Nikon Z bodies they offer a newer RAW format called "High Efficiency * ", I (and others) have yet to see ANY difference vs uncompressed, like you mention. This is a perfect setting for me, as the files are only about 1/3 larger than its highest-quality JPG version. Both / all formats have their use case for sure 👍🏻

I confess I clicked mostly because of Jared Polin hahaha good bait Simon! ;) RAW shooter here, but I'm sure many people fully benefit from shooting Jpeg, especially those who need to deliver photos super fast. I will definitely experiment CRAW from now on: I didn't think of it as an option, but if you don't see any difference on 45mp R5, I suspect it will be the same on my R6! Anyway, like everything else on your channel, I appreciate that your content does not focus on ''purist'' crap like ''shooting Jpeg or APS-C is for amateurs'', etc... You give the neutral pros and cons and let the people decide what works best for them. At the end of the day, 99% of published photos are in Jpeg! Good video and great channel: could be renamed Simonknowsbestphoto ;)

Yes please astro photography

Don't ask if we want astrophotography video. WE WANT all the videos possible from you ! You really help my photography (wildlife mostly). I don't think there is better photography source on youtube than your channel. Thanks a lot, keep up the video !!!! (Désolé pour mon anglais car je suis du Québec 🙂)

Unpopular take: I’ve never seen a Jared photo that I thought was anything special. However, Simon just drops these amazing photos so casually 😂

Thank you Simon. Always the most thoughtful, instructive and focussed advice. Peerless.

Another great video, thank you so much. I've always shot JPEG and nothing else, ever since getting my first digital camera in 2004. It seems crazy to judge people for not shooting RAW, as a few KZfaqrs out there do. Surely it's the pictures that matter. I'm happy with mine and love the idea of letting the camera do the work for me, subject to some input from me (R8, Z50).

I did this exact same independent study on my own after upgrading from the Sony A6500 to the Sony A7IV. After a few weeks I switched completely over to Sony's Compressed RAW format as well. Just like you said 99% of the quality with half the file size.

Great video, & simplified explanations of the various modes. I'm a senior, hobby photographer that shoots primarily in JPEG & I try very hard to get it right in the camera. Post usually requires a minor tweak in exposure & I'm happy with that . I will try compressed though, but I'm not one to spend a lot of time tweaking my photos. Fujis tend to underexpose so that's easy to compensate for when composing the shot.

Wow you are a natural teacher, explaining this topic in an easy-to-follow manner without being boring at all. I'm so happy I found your channel, I'm subscribing immediately.

I am glad Simon spilling the beans. Jpeg photography has its place. For Raw I use compressed Raw of course as with my amount of photos taken, storage is an issue. Every now and then I go Jpeg-only which overall improves my photography as it is more fun to get things right in the photo than trying to save something in post.

I 99.9% shoot in jpeg. I am capturing memories with my wife and family. We travel 6 months a year taking pictures and sharing them on Facebook. I prefer taking pictures on my Sony A74 with 28-200 f2.8 lens as I able to get shoots much easier than with a cell phone.

As a Fuji guy I almost forgot people think RAW images are what make you a "professional" lol. I have piles of dialed in recipes for all sorts of looks, no need to waste time sitting editing (mostly!). I always shoot dual JPEG/RAW but at this point the JPEG often looks better than the mood Im trying to match in the RAW anyways. Same for video.

Simon, that was the BEST video on Raw vs JPEG I've seen and I've watched many. Also that was the BEST Squarespace ad I've ever seen and I've seen Countless of those. Nice job. 👌

Really informative! Recently I've been shooting JPEG for events to simplify my workflow for fast-paced work, but I think I may give cRAW a try for an event I'm working this weekend and see how it turns out. I always saw cRAW as a bit of a pointless halfway house, but your video clearly shows that it isn't.

I started doing color separations using analog methods at National Geographic in the mid 1970s and managed the transition to digital for color separation starting in the 1980s with Hell Scanners and transparencies and in the early 1990s with first digital cameras and versions of Photoshop which didn’t have any color management until around version three. JPEG encoding actually takes the RGB pixel data and converts it to Lab color coordinates before compressing it. The reduction in file sizes comes from averaging blocks of pixels and from the fact that in Lab format the yellow-blue and magenta-green channels are very flat so you can average very large blocks of them with relatively less loss of image fidelity vs. trying to average blocks of RGB data. In the early days of digital bit depth of files was a big issue because of banding which would occur in subtle gradations of tone such as skies. The more bit depth at capture and pixel density per square inch increased the less and less those things became a factor. Another huge difference with the current generation of mirrorless sensors camera is that exposure control at capture is much better meaning few times extreme measures are needed to optimize exposure when editing. So yes, with today’s cameras one can do as well as raw by shooting JPEG. But at the same time the processors are so fast and CF Cards so fast and high capacity and low cost per MB compared to ten or twenty years ago there isn’t any real burden shooting RAW unless trying to maximize frame per second when shooting. The differences time-wise editing RAW vs JPEG isn’t that significant especially if the user is not aware of how to do things like blending channels to pull out detail in RAW files in Lab format that can’t be done in RGB format. Read books by Dan Margulis and try some of the techniques he teaches as I did and you’ll better appreciate the nuances of shooting and editing in RAW and what happens differently “under the hood” in the editing software with the different file types.

lol, love it! You and Jared are my two favorites. The friendly banter is fun.

Well done comparisson!

I love shooting raw ! Editing is just that much better

I have been shooting CRAW since I had the setting available. I have never seen an issue. I use this on my R5 and R7. A friend of mine was complaining about all the time it was taking him to process his images from his son's sporting events. He was shooting RAW. I asked why. He said because he saw online he needed to. I suggested he shot in JPEG for a while to see what he thought. He realized that for his expectations and needs that JPEG worked great. It saved him a ton of time that could be better spent doing other things, like playing with his son.

I've been watching your channel on and off for a while now. I'd like to thank you (Simon) for taking the time and trouble to post such informative and well researched videos. They are quite simple excellent.

I can answer that question without having seen the video: absolutely yes.

As far as file size, website, sharing images, etc., I shoot RAW, then export most images as sRGB JPEG, and get to where you are, but I retain the file depth that works well in my post processing workflow for my landscape, and nightscape photography. For everyday shots, JPEG is undoubtedly a faster workflow.

I shoot only RAW, but I might give compressed RAW a try. Color temperature is my bigger concern, more than exposure and I 'd rather tackle it in Lightroom rather in camera.

Tks! One of your very best, Simon.

Thank you so much Simon, I can't tell you how much I have been learning from your videos!

I shoot RAW but I will give compressed RAW a try now. Thanks Simon, excellent video as always!

I shoot jpg for work because we don't get to edit before the images are prepared for print sales. This means we need to get everything right in camera. The files from my R6 ii or 1DX ii look amazing. For personal work I shoot RAW.

JPEG In over 500 projects only once needed more image size. That was a video of horses running in a darkened arena illuminated by the "Christmas lights" mounted on the riders and horses. This was also a project where a more modern cinema camera, with cinema lenses stole the show C100 MkII blew my 5D Mk III away.

One of the best explanations of image format I have heard. Thanks Simon :)))

RAW is cumbersome and if you're not a Professional photographer, it's 10X more cumbersome...I used to shoot RAW years back, but as jPegs have evolved overtime, I'm fine with the cons of jpeg vs the hassle of RAW

I shoot RAW + JPEG because storage is dirt cheap and it's nice having the option to either instantly share the image or process it with more latitude.

Thank you Simon. This is a revelation. We are portrait/headshot/pet photographers, sometimes all three are combined in one client session. Lighting is controlled, making shadow noise and blown highlights a non-issue. I am switching my R5 settings to compressed RAW.

This is an amazing piece of content. Some people are born to be the educators - I believe you're one of them. At no point in this video was I bored or distracted. Couldn't stop watching. Informative and to the point. Great job.

I started shooting in 1970 and made 1000’s of slides. To me JPEG’s are rather like shooting slides back in the day. I pretty much under exposed most of my images by ⅓ to ⅔ under. Hotspots or pure white areas were way worse than dark shadow areas. I’m going to try out compressed RAW on my Canon EOS R and Nikon Z7 and maybe even my GFX 50SII. I’m for sure going to shoot JPEG the next time I’m at the hydroplane races. My last boat race I took 4000+ images in 2 days. That was way too much processing. Thanks for the great comparison and all the useful info

I like shooting both raw and jpg on separate sd cards. Its faster for me to review the jpegs cause they load faster . Sometimes i use the jpeg as is tbh

Best video on topic

Thank you! Always learning from you.

What a contrast from the so called Pros! I love it. Thanks Simon! Bo

Hi Simon. To appreciate HEIF you need that your hardware and software support it. It is not only about having10-bit vs the 8-bit of JPEG. It is also that the HEIF (HDR) pictures use a much wider dynamic range that JPEG (SDR). That is where the hardware comes in. A standard display, as they exist since the '90s, have about 500-600 nits of luminosity. The whole digital imagery pipeline was built around that and that is what JPEG is designed for. So the image is stored in a way that assumes an SDR display. On the other hand, as Canon save the HEIF images in a .HIF file, the dynamic range is extended to support a display with 1600nits of luminosity, the PQ standard, that is much much brighter. That is the HDR standard, or HDR PQ for Canon. (do not confuse the classic meaning of HDR in photography i.e bracketing shots to work around the limited dynamic range of the sensor or rather bring it within SDR, this has NOTHING to do with the HDR display technology and is targeting old tech SDR displays). So if your display is a true HDR display (the 12.9in iPad Pro only, some high end iPhone Pro, some XDR MacBook Pro, etc), then if the software supports HDR then you will see the picture in true HDR. If your display and software is not true HDR some conversion happen in the background to show the picture in SDR and this is usually poorly done. But with true HDR hardware it is quite amazing looking a picture of a sunrise, sunset, a city scape at night with lights, etc. The bright object are shining like in real life. Final note, if you capture a HIF picture and want to look at it on a SDR display, you need to first properly convert it to SDR. The tone curves must be mapped intelligently or else poor images quality results. All in all, SDR display technology is so old and we are so used to it, it is hard to move to HDR. The movie industry is moving quickly. The photo industry, which is so conservative, goes much slower. But it will get there. The one piece that cannot move to HDR is printing, which by nature is a very low dynamic range medium. It produces no luminosity at all being passive. Our brain guess what is bright. Print will never be able to show HDR images. That is certainly something holding back photography and cinematography is not bothered with that, obviously. As you can guess I have tested HEIF and I love it for pictures with a bright lights part of the image (sun, stars, artificial lights, etc). It creates images that JPEG cannot show and never will. A final note it is easy to created a HIEF image from a RAW file, the RAW already contain all the required information, The software essentially render to an HDR tone curve instead of the SDR tone curve. Latest versions of photo editing softwares can do that. I use Photomator, but Lightroom and others can do it as well. So from RAW you can produce HIF or JPEG images. From HIF you can also produce a JPEG. You cannot however produce a HIF from a JPEG, the information required is simply not there. Cheers.

Oh man! i waited till the end of the vid just to see what you decided to shoot in and was pleasantly surprised when you decided CRAW. That is exactly what i shoot in and have been for some time. Absolutely great explanation on the different formats. Thanks you again for another great vid!

another great video Simon

Great tips once again. Challenge accepted. I’ll start trying out compressed raw.

I always shoot compressed RAW because I do want to always process my images, especially with evening street photography to get a more filmic look. And the file size is so much more easier on my storage. I only use JPEG for that moment I need to share the photos directly without the ability to process at all. Which was twice now. Please more of these kinds of videos. We don't seem to have as many of these, or at least not as apparent as they need to fight 'how to make your images sharper' videos. This one as well as the image profile/picture style video were just amazing and eye opening.

Your view makes a lot of sense, and I don't think that Froknow would be angry. Basically, everyone shoots RAW and almost everyone publishes their final images in JPEG. Something somewhere performs the conversion, in the process throwing away a lot of the initial data. You can have your camera's computer chip do the whole conversion or run the raw image through a processor like Lightroom. Lightroom gives you a lot more control and gives you more time to make artistic decisions. You can cut the time down by using presets, either yours or someone else's. Your choice. The problems crop up when you try to modify a JPEG, since you've then thrown away almost all of the data that would have helped you make the modification.

Very helpful, Simon!

I've been waiting for astrophotography videos from you, Simon. So yes, please treat us to one! 🙂

I used to shoot both, but stopped using raw when it was eating up too much storage space and find my JPEGs are just as good for what I do.

Thank you Simon.. I learnt something here.

Hello Simon! I love your channel and have been following along since the beginning. I would love to see a video about finding places to go for wildlife photography. I’ve improved my photography on the technical side so much recently, largely thanks to you, but I often find that the most difficult part can be finding animals to photograph in the first place! I think hearing your thoughts on where different types of animals like to be and when, as well as land access & not breaking rules, would be very helpful to a lot of folks. Cheers and thank you for sharing your knowledge!

I shoot raw + jpeg but I make too many mistakes and have been surprised by even some of my worst shots, I’ve been able to edit and salvage them

New thumbnails please😬

As usual, Simon, another home run. Thank you for sharing and cutting through the mud of all the settings and behind the scenes tech. You've sold me to try C-RAW and I'm heading out to try it today.

Man - you are asking rhetorical questions like "Would you like to see how I do...?" - OF COURSE! Your experience is priceless! (And thanks for that!)

hahaha hilarious topic title,...i rarely shoot raw

i would love to see a video where you actually go out into the field and take photos, it would be a good break from your recent, unoriginal video styles.

Thanks Simon, another great video. You're the best!

Simon is a great photographer. Far better than me. Shoot RAW. Always.

The internet is full of advice; so as to not miss out here's mine: shoot whatever works for you and have fun doing it!

I have been wondering about the different levels of RAW recently. Very happy to learn this from you. Thanks again for the top quality info!

Sports photographer here, and with 1,000+ frames per game, I've always shot exclusively CRAW. The difference is in quality negligible at best, and I've never had any issues in terms of editing flexibility. Thanks for throwing some respect on CRAW's name~

I watched one of Simon’s videos a while back where he discussed this. I have been using c-raw since then. Great work Simon

Simon knows best💯👍

Thanks a lot Simon! You are an expert in explaining complicated matters so it’s easy to understand even for amateurs. And I’d love to see a video on shooting with a telescope. I got all the gears for shooting myself, but the physical dimensions makes impossible to focus my camera.

That was the best segue I have ever seen. To the point where I sighed in amazement, thinking you were gonna suggest using raw for the best quality and to show the photos at their best. Well done.

Brilliant 👏 👏 I will change to craw going forward

Thanks Simon. This is very useful information. I will definitely try compressed raw on my cameras.

I think JPG is closer to the experience of the average photographer when only film existed. Less creative control-no darkroom skills. RAW and photoshop (after it became affordable) came along and opened a broader world of creative control to weekend shooters. Shooting JPG for a while might help to hone some forgotten skills that lead to better in-camera results.

I'm a Fuji user, professional wedding photographer. JPGs are totally fine!! I often just edit the JPGs a little bit and hand over.

Yeaah we shoot in jpeg a lot haha for our land stuff. But underwater it's a lot easier to pull info with RAW. Though often when everything is said and done and edited, our stuff doesn't look too different surprisingly.

Great video Simon… Thanks for doing our homework lol.. l’ve always shot JPEG whenever I’m shooting for Facebook! On top of everything else Facebook’s compression will destroy your hi res photos anyway, unless you process them for Facebook yourself!

This was great stuff.

Such an awesome explanation

Thank you, this video is really helpful and has great information.

Great video! I have been wondering about compressed Raw but I didn't know how to test it. You did a great test and now I understand the effect of C Raw much better. Thanks!

You are amazing sir!

Merci Simon .Tres bien expliqué 🎥🎬

Very interesting the compressed RAW

The solution: shoot in RAW & JPEG. 1 click, 2 formats. When doing events or quick jobs, you send JPEGs, with or without minimum adjustments, to your client and for photography that requires post production you can go wild with RAW in Lightroom or/and Photoshop. This discussion is not about which format is best, but about what works best given the circumstances.

Great video, Simon! You have a gift of teaching. Another reason to consider the smaller size of compressed RAW (C-RAW) is for cloud storage (say, for those using Adobe’s Lightroom cloud storage).

Cheers so much makes complete sense 😊❤

Simon, you're such an asset. Your videos are the only ones I keep watching. You really know how to structure a topic and keep cranking out vital information at such a density and pace it's breathtaking. Your success on YT is well deserved. I hope you keep on making videos until everything has been said. :-) Unfortunately there is an inflation of purely technical comparisons or clownish entertainment - what a waste of time. This here is just experiences based, real world photography. Love it.

Yet again awesome video mate and the top on animations were good and explainery! Keep up the good work! ❤

Great review!!!

I shoot in both formats. Because if the frame needs significant correction, the jpeg will not cope.

Thank you Simon. Your are a huge help to all photographers of all levels. You make people think! I will spend more thought on my cropping. People buy photographs because they love the subject, the story, the message and how it makes them feel. As a photographer that is what I work to capture. I am far more concerned about the impact of my photography on the person viewing the final image than I am about any criticism from a pixel perfectionist. Often, many subjects, scenes and lighting will work out great using JPG. If you need to produce many images where JPG will deliver a satisfactory image then absolutely use JPG. I shoot birds, other wildlife and nature scenes where there is not usually a chance to get a second shot of an event. I take thousands of photos and delete 95+% of them because either they are not very special or they are not the best shot out of a group or a burst. I need every opportunity to get the best possible finished photo from the image file. That is why I shoot only in Raw. If my camera offered cRAW I would use it as there is no visible difference. If I were shooting under controlled conditions I would be shooting JPG.