Being an amateur photographer, the benefits of RAW have been tremendous.
I think it all boils down to your workflow ... if you shoot hundreds of images every day, then yes, JPEG would seem an ideal choice.
I shoot in RAW 95% of the time. I then browse through the images with Nikon's Picture Project, and find the ones I will do extensive post-processing on. I convert those to DNGs, and the rest to JPEGs.
Since I love to post-process, RAW is the ideal choice. Perhaps the greatest benefit to an amateur is recovering "lost" data, ie WB, brightness, shadows, etc. There have been several times I thought I had the perfect shot, only to find it underexposed or overexposed. This correction, I've found, is much more difficult in JPEG. Plus, if you are going to make large prints, RAW is certainly the better choice.
If you are really worried about space, you can always do as others mentioned: burn to a CD or DVD. Blank media is REALLY cheap these days.
I don't think the RAW vs. JPEG should be the issue. Both formats have their strengths. It all comes down to workflow and personal preference.
My two cents. :)
|
