We always heard that shooting in RAW is better, where more details can be recorded, and the range of post-production is also wider. But how big is the difference between RAW and JPG? From Tony Northrup’s tutorial, it has shown that the difference between both, which is worth as a reference!
As a conclusion for the tutorial, the pros or RAW are:
Larger motion range (01:20) (03:05) (04:05) (04:58) (06:05) (07:35)
Raw files have a larger motion range, there under the circumference of big difference of light source, the details under brighter and dimmer environment can be more recorded. Therefore using some techniques in post-production, the details under overexposed and underexposed can be shown.
White balance is adjustable freely (02.15)
If you are using JPEG format to shoot, the white balance is determined by the camera, which is difficult to retouch at the post-production session, and even it is retouched there might be damage to the image quality. In comparison, using RAW format to shoot, the white balance can be freely adjusted during the post-production without damaging the quality if the image.
There is also stated the cons of using RAW format, that is the file size is relatively large. and the most significant cons is during time-lapse shooting. The normal RAW file usually takes more than 10MB. If you are using the RAW format as time-lapse picture format, you would not able to shoot too much, due to the disability of camera to process such a number of the RAW file at the same time. Therefore at this time, JPEG format shooting might be a better choice.
Besides that, I believe that everyone noticed that the RAW file is highly relatable with post-production. if your photography habits do not often require a lot of post-production, shooting files is less, then storing and sharing JPEG might be more convenient and a better choice.