I am a beginner, should I still be shooting RAW?

  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I see you already got answers from RAW fanatics ;) but even some pros have reasons to shoot JPEG, just like some have reasons to shoot RAW. I don't think you're going to get any valid and relevant answers to your situation without doing your homework and figuring out which file format (and therefore workflow) to side with. See other questions on this site about RAW/JPEG to find out what the workflow implications are. \$\endgroup\$
    – Itai
    Feb 14, 2011 at 3:55
  • 11
    \$\begingroup\$ I am also concerned that you are making a lead-in question when you say 'to retouch your photos yet'. The better you get, the more I expect you to NOT retouch your photos. At least that is what I expect of my photography students :) \$\endgroup\$
    – Itai
    Feb 14, 2011 at 3:57
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ @Itai - Do you honestly believe that you can get to a point where absolutely no retouching is needed? Does "retouching" also include changing the brightness and contrast? What about sharpening? What about some noise reductions? RAW files need to be developed, just like negative films need(ed) to be developed. \$\endgroup\$ Feb 14, 2011 at 9:31
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Benjamin Whoa, that kinda seems like a 'bristly' response to @Itai, doesn't it? I don't really see any sort of sweeping 'RAW is bad, only shoot JPEG' statements in his comment... Only a suggestion that the OP do his homework and evaluate fully the benefits and drawbacks of both RAW and JPEG before deciding for himself on which one to shoot... Just seems like this comment thread has the potential to turn into Yet Another RAW vs JPEG Holy War debate and nobody wants that... Can't we all just get along? ;-) \$\endgroup\$ Feb 14, 2011 at 17:29
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ Regardless of where we fall on the RAW <--> JPEG spectrum with our photography, I think we can all agree that using RAW as a crutch to take poor pictures because "I can just fix it in post" is a bad practice... \$\endgroup\$ Feb 14, 2011 at 18:06

13 Answers 13


Im going to go against the grain and say that you should shoot with whatever format you find easier to work with.

The downside to raw is that it's a two step process. If you're a beginner, you might not have settled in on a workflow and may find that RAW files might be too cumbersome to work with.

I prefer RAW, and I generally think it's the better choice, but as a beginner, there are far more important things that should take your attention instead of editors, and file formats.

A RAW file isn't going to save your images from being boring, from being out of focus, or for being just plain bad. If you spend your time trying to retouch so-so looking photos just because you can, you'll miss out on learning how to take good photos first!

Said another way, a properly exposed jpeg looks far better than a mediocre photo shot with RAW.

Learning proper exposure techniques, framing, subject, and artistry are so much more important.

I think it's a fun exercise to go back and rework old images using new techniques, but I don't think its something that should be encouraged. Better to go out and take new photographs, than toil away and rehashing old ones. In my most humblest of opinions of course.

  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ i like this answer, i really need to just focus on learning the basics first, I have a D7000 so if i'm ever in an area that I cannot revisit easily (on a trip or something) I can shoot jpg + raw and backup the raws in case I want to revisit them later. I just picked up Aperture and am using the Preset adjustments at the moment if needed. Thanks! \$\endgroup\$ Feb 14, 2011 at 7:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ Damn, this is the answer I was planning to write ;) Oh, well, it's a +1 from me! \$\endgroup\$
    – gerikson
    Feb 14, 2011 at 10:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ Love the answer. Everybody to his taste and don't lose the focus on photography. \$\endgroup\$
    – Leonidas
    Feb 14, 2011 at 12:23
  • \$\begingroup\$ The other downsides to RAW are the storage space used and the slower speed. (fewer FPS/shorter burst). \$\endgroup\$
    – TREE
    Feb 14, 2011 at 15:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Jon: If you are ever in a situation where you don't want to miss the shot, go ahead and set the camera to PAE, or Greenbox. That is basically "fool proof mode" which lets the camera do most of the work. It wont help in a complex lit scene, but for average scenes it does the job. To me, having that fool-proof setting relieves the pressure of having to nail the exposure. It's just something you know in the back of your mind that if you have too, you can fall back on. \$\endgroup\$
    – Alan
    Feb 14, 2011 at 19:05

There's a great question on here of a list of the advantages of RAW, so I won't rehash them here. That said, I'd definitely encourage you to shoot RAW even if you're a beginner. Here's why:

  • shooting RAW vs. JPG won't change the basics of photography. You'll still want to make the same considerations when in the field for choosing your exposure, lighting, composition, and so on. If anything, RAW allows for a bit more room for error.
  • all major photo editing programs, even those used by beginners such as iPhoto, Picasa, or Photoshop Elements, support RAW
  • even if you don't do much advanced editing now, you'll always be able to come back to your images in the future when you've honed your skills a bit. Perhaps you don't know enough now where the difference between RAW and JPG is that big of a deal, but six months down the road you might want to revisit some images and unfortunately if you didn't shoot RAW, that data is gone forever.
  • \$\begingroup\$ RE down the road. I recently inherited a bunch of my grandmother's old black and whites. If only I had RAW versions (ie negatives) of those shots. \$\endgroup\$
    – mmccoo
    Feb 14, 2011 at 3:23
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ I can't stress @ahockley's last point enough. In the thread he linked, my original attempts at post-processing that photo of Yellowstone Lower Falls were pretty bad. I had only been a photographer for a few weeks at my first attempt. It was after some time that I came back and reworked it as an HDR image, once I had a better understanding of photography and how to post-process an image. Definitely shoot RAW...stuff you take today that you may think is unsalvageable crap may be a masterpiece down the road. ;) \$\endgroup\$
    – jrista
    Feb 14, 2011 at 4:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ +1 on that last point. I have a couple images from my very early days with a borrowed digital camera trying to figure out if I should move off of film myself that I only have jpgs of, knowing what I know now I could salvage them in the digital darkroom if the were raws. The attempts I've made on the jpgs, are just disappointing. \$\endgroup\$
    – cabbey
    Feb 14, 2011 at 5:46
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm also suffering from that last point. I have some images that were my first and were shot in JPEG and I am unable to go back and edit them the way I would like if I had raw files. If you don't take advantage of raw now, just shoot in JPEG+raw and use the JPEGs now and the raws later. \$\endgroup\$
    – tenmiles
    Dec 27, 2012 at 23:53

Two years from now, when you're not a beginner any more, you may be able to go back to the shots you took in RAW and make them much better than you would be able to today.

On the other hand, two years from now you will be taking better shots and you won't care to go back over your earlier rejects.

If you're in a situation where you're getting once-in-a-lifetime opportunities, take RAW+JPEG. Otherwise just settle for JPEG until you're at a point where you know what RAW will do for you.

  • \$\begingroup\$ That depends on whether the shot is a once-in-a-lifetime shot. You're assuming that people shooting photos don't actually care about the subject. That's not always true. :-) \$\endgroup\$
    – dgatwood
    Feb 19, 2017 at 22:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @dgatwood I figured that everybody would identify with one and only one of my first two paragraphs; they're contradictory. My final paragraph is my actual advice, which already has the exception for "once-in-a-lifetime". If it's pictures of your kids, who will never be as young as they are today, go ahead and shoot RAW. \$\endgroup\$ Feb 20, 2017 at 1:07
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Fair enough. The problem is that once-in-a-lifetime opportunities don't necessarily advertise themselves ahead of time, or even at the time. Neither of the two photos that I wish I could get in higher resolution were shots that I would have expected to want to use later at the time. They both turned out to be something special only in hindsight. \$\endgroup\$
    – dgatwood
    Feb 20, 2017 at 19:45

When I started photography, I was in the same dilemma and I chose to shoot JPEG over RAW.

I had only one 8GB memory card and I could shoot 900 images in JPEG format while switching to RAW, I could shoot only around 250 shots. Its important for a beginner to shoot a lot of photos and get your hands free. The ratio of keepers will also be low for beginners and shooting RAW will just lower the number of keepers (as the total number of pictures you can take in RAW will be lower than you can take in JPEG). And also for beginners there will be a lot of photos which will be off-focused/wrong focused/missing subjects etc etc and you don't need to think twice before deleting those images so there isn't a point to keep large files.

If I were you, I'd concentrate more on learning and getting perfect images before I switch to RAW. Modern DSLRs produce good enough JPEGs these days and you still can do a lot of corrections on JPEG images, might not be as good as RAWs but not bad as well.

Now, my answer totally depends on which level of beginner you are. I'd suggest, shoot first 10,000 images in JPEG, learn from your mistakes and then switch to RAW.

  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ When I started photography, you got about 25 shots from a film and couldn't preview them. 250 photo's would have blown my mind! Having a limited amount does focus your mind into taking the best shots and thinking before you go trigger happy. \$\endgroup\$ Feb 14, 2011 at 9:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ Well even a thousand images can prove to be limited comparing to professionals who use multiple Sandisk Extreme Pro 32GB CF cards! Its true that lower number of photos helps you think better but at the same time it does not promote learn-through-practice or learn-by-making-mistakes which I think beginners need the most. \$\endgroup\$ Feb 14, 2011 at 10:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Designer023 thinking before each shot does give you better outcomes, but only if you have enough experience to do the right kind of thinking. See the story at the beginning of blog.codinghorror.com/quantity-always-trumps-quality \$\endgroup\$ Jan 19, 2015 at 22:54

There's so many advantages to RAW its hard to say no. The only concern is that it really easy to feel that you don't need to take the time to get it right in camera because RAW can be quite forgiving in post.

I'd still recommend it, really for all the same reasons in the linked question, but remember you'll always get a better product if you take the time to get it right in camera first. Put the time into every shot, a little extra time up front can save much frustration later.


Any beginner that would even bother to ask the question will benefit from RAW input.

I'd say that especially for beginners, RAW format makes things more forgiving. Beginners are more likely to get the exposure wrong. With RAW format, you can often recover from that.

Using the word retouching makes it sound complicated and advanced. To start, just load your raw files into Google's Picasa (it's free) and do some exposure adjustment. If your image is under or over exposed, this adjustment will have more to work with.

If you're in the middle of bush country and you're really trying to stretch the capacity of your flash cards, I could understand not using RAW. Otherwise, bits are cheap.

Actually, I just did a price check on flash cards. If you can afford a camera that has a RAW mode (and you're lucky enough to be visiting bush country), then you can buy a pocket full of cards that can hold more pictures than you could take.

So, there's no reason not to shoot in RAW. It's just better.

I like to make analogies. Say, in your area, a radio station is being broadcast on both AM and FM (NPR for example). Would you ever listen to the AM version?

  • \$\begingroup\$ Sure, if I'm at the edge of the FM broadcast region, the AM station probably sounds better. I like to break analogies. \$\endgroup\$
    – Evan Krall
    Feb 14, 2011 at 3:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'd abstain from RAW, err, FM too if tuning into a song on the FM-station costs me five minutes per song because my receiver is finicky (as is RAW per se). I like to put analogies into absurdistan. \$\endgroup\$
    – Leonidas
    Feb 14, 2011 at 4:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ These analogies will grow on you like you're room-temperature Canadian beef and the analogy is a colony of E. Coli. I like to meta my analogies into abstraction. ;-) \$\endgroup\$ Feb 14, 2011 at 18:56

I think this is a case where you should clarify beginner a bit more. Are you a beginner at photography, photo-editing or both.

Assuming you are both, I would not recommend shooting in raw, I would not recommend shooting in both jpeg and raw at this stage because it does not server any great advantage at the moment and can make file management more difficult.

Most windows based operating systems don't support raw images and you require the utilities that are included with the camera to view and edit these files. Which when used with large amount of pictures can become a pain.

However I would recommend you to shoot with both if there are shots that require great detail.

But as a beginner focus on the techniques of photography first, then you can think about using raw images and image post-processing (which should be your last resort)

  • \$\begingroup\$ Many programs are available to the beginner to handle basic RAW processing, even Picasa. Photo management and processing is something to learn and not to put off until you have 10000 jpgs laying around that you don't know what to do with. \$\endgroup\$
    – rfusca
    Feb 14, 2011 at 3:01

If you don't use RAW - you'll miss out on a world of work you can do on your images and subsequently won't learn as much about what you can do.

I have 2 analogies here:

  1. It is a bit like asking whether you should get a camera which produces prints only (something like a polaroid) and you never get any negatives. You get a usable result immediately but the quality isn't necessarily there and you are limited with what you can do after the photograph is taken. Remember jpg is a lossy format, so every time it is saved and altered, you lose quality through image compression. People demonise 'retouching' in photoshop etc as if it is the devil's own work - but remember, we played with the images in the darkroom too :) Granted you should get it as right as you can in camera but RAW gives you a little room to move on an image perhaps not quite there.

  2. Would everyone recommend to a user to stay with automatic mode on their DSLR or would they suggest using manual? If you stay within the comfortable confines of automatic mode you will never learn how to use the camera in manual mode - the same is applicable here with post processing where a jpg is more or less like automatic mode.

Unless I am working on a shoot which requires a very fast image turn around and have a decent day light wise I use the format which gives me the digital negative (which is effectively what a RAW file is). As said there are reasons to shoot straight to jpg but I wouldn't make this the rule, rather the exception.

For you this enforces the learning curve (and the basics which get applied in camera on a jpg aren't rocket science anyway) rather than avoiding it. Subsequently, you will learn by doing.


As a beginner, you should be shooting with auto settings and shoot in JPEG. The camera does pretty well with auto settings.

As an intermediate user, you need to learn the manual settings and use RAW instead.

Others point out that many image editors support RAW images but they often look horrible and seem much worse than cooked JPEG and that's NOT what a beginner should be seeing.

RAW is for seasoned users who enjoy manipulating them in RAW editors. RAW is time consuming. It takes a LOT of memory and storage and CPU processing. JPG is super efficient and quick but it will never offer much lattitude in exposure or more color depth.

And folks, remember, we're talking about beginners, not experienced shooters.


As a beginner with my Canon 450D, I did an experiment shooting at dusk in RAW + JPEG. I found that while in areas where JPG files showed white (the remaining daylight) or black (shadow), the corresponding RAW file actually resolved detail. I also noticed colour differences between the two files. As a result, I basically never shoot JPG anymore.

Even when shooting in continuous shooting mode, the 450D copes pretty well. I've never filled up the buffer on it, though I don't shoot many frames at once.

The only problem with RAW, is that I can't just take my SD card out of my camera and pop into the TV for an instant slide show.


Did you ever try to change color balance on a JPEG? It can't be done. But if you shoot in full auto mode anyway - well, you are just a point and shooter anyhow. RAW lets you change the manual settings you made at the time of exposure - so, for example, you change all those auto white balance shots to daylight and get the right color balance.

You can't change exposure much because unless you intentionally underexpose, you will end up with blown highlights - a major sin.

Also RAW allows you to change sharpening after the fact - a really important consideration for big prints which show up when the sharpening is too high.


Why not? When you are a beginner everything is learning, whatever you do you are learning and practicing. I personally first learned about shooting in RAW from this guide http://www.paintshoppro.com/en/pages/raw-images/ and I didn't even have a camera to do it, so I used my phone as soon as iOS got the new updated which allows to shoot in RAW. I did shoot in RAW but had no idea how to edit RAW images, but I wanted to, so I played around with editing, and at the beginning it looked really bad, but thru time I learned some tricks and improved :) Nobody can tell you not to shoot RAW because you are a beginner, there is no law on that. If you want to, do it! And don't get frustrated if you are bad with editing, just continue to dig and practice and you'll get better at it! :) Good luck with shooting!


Raw format help you to correct yourself in most of the cases but it eats a lot of memory ..


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.