I do what Jared does because he's right. There's no reason to shoot JPEG if you have the memory, the hard drive space and the buffer.
Why research image quality of different cameras if you're not going to shoot in RAW?
A typical shoot for me (sports fot) ends with a memory card of 400-800 photos. (though I did an athletics meet a few weeks ago with 1300).
I copy these to my laptop in 5-10 mins.
Spend 15 mins in Fotostation looking at full screen previews and deleting anything I won't use, typically 70-80% because I take a lot of bursts with 4-6 photos each.
Now I'm down to approx 150 photos.
I select 8-12 best shots of the day and process, then send to client.
Takes literally 1 hours after I first take the card from the camera.
The rest of the photos generally don't take too long because if I'm shooting sports in one location, I just set a lot of image settings the same and adjust the exposure for each spending at most, a minute on each.
Save all as full-res 2mb JPEG, send to client, keep both JPEG and DNG files on hard drive.
(150×2mb) + (150×24mb) = 3.9gb
2×5tb external HDD was 430AUD
Enough storage for 2 copies of every shot for ~1200 jobs.
And given the number of people here shooting portrait and landscapes, these numbers are probably 4 times that of most people on here.
It blows my mind that people want to spend 2 grand on a camera, 5 grand on lenses and then save everything in what is obviously a lesser format.
