[5-21] “Economics of data: a photographer’s perspective”

Photographs for six years—I look back and see my camera accumulating data. Large amounts; D750 gets 24 megapixels (~25 mb/image), higher-ends capture 45 (~36mb).

The question about raw/jpeg is more what a person feels regarding speed:

JPEG (fast, compressed, web friendly) <--> RAW (large, flexible, unwieldy)

For my blog of practical images (receipts, readings, product reviews) I’d err to shoot in raw; the extra information is 99.99% superfluous, like carrying a textbook when only one chapter is needed.

The extra get chopped during export, anyways.

Many do not see this—there’s a tendency to believe more (raw) is better.

JPEGs:raw => 1:17 (size ratio)

With thousands of images imported each month, differences:

•  Transfer/back-up speeds

•  Need to export in low-resolution

•  Previews take longer

•  Slower to cull/navigate 😢

The question is more: “Then why ever use RAW?”

Simply, RAW is better if mistakes are made.

White balance is not baked in; highlights/shadows contain more data, more pliable (e.g. overexposed skin, underexposed shadows).

It makes sense to shoot long-term work with RAW. 

It also makes sense for beginners, as storage is not a big problem; flexibility for mistakes helps.

Because a professional has an interest in speed, quantity is not preferable unless accompanied by quality. It is a mark of an experienced photographer who takes fewer but more interesting, useful, and variegated images.