Choosing between raw and JPEG can feel overwhelming if you’re new to photography, but your decision significantly impacts the quality and usability of your wildlife photos. It’s crucial to understand the practical differences rather than focusing purely on technical specifications.

Coming to you from Danielle Carstens with C4 Photo Safaris, this insightful video examines the practical implications of shooting in raw versus JPEG, specifically tailored for wildlife photography. Carstens emphasizes that there’s no universal best choice—it’s about your specific circumstances and goals. For instance, if you prefer minimal editing or primarily share images casually through social media or messaging apps, JPEG may suffice. JPEG files are edited in-camera, appearing sharper and more vibrant straight out of the camera, making them ideal for quick sharing without extensive editing. However, this convenience comes at a cost, particularly when fine-tuning is required later.

Raw files preserve all the original data captured by your camera’s sensor, offering greater flexibility during editing. If you plan to print large formats, sell your work, or enter competitions, raw is the better option. It allows extensive adjustments to exposure, white balance, and color without losing image quality. Carstens highlights that for wildlife photography—especially when capturing intricate details such as feathers, fur textures, or dealing with high contrast scenes—raw provides significantly superior results. The dynamic range of raw files ensures you can recover details in shadows and highlights that JPEG would otherwise discard.

Carstens also discusses the often overlooked aspect of file storage. Raw files are considerably larger, requiring substantial storage space and investment in external hard drives or cloud backups. If you’re unwilling or unable to manage these storage demands, JPEG remains a practical choice. Additionally, Carstens raises critical questions about your shooting conditions. Photographing wildlife frequently involves mixed lighting scenarios, where shade and sunlight blend, complicating color accuracy. In these instances, raw’s adjustable white balance capabilities far surpass JPEG’s limited color correction.

Carstens further explains the value of raw when shooting distant subjects, emphasizing how compression in JPEG files can intensify atmospheric distortion like heat haze, negatively impacting image sharpness and clarity. For wildlife subjects captured from afar, raw captures finer detail, essential for enhancing images through noise reduction and sharpening during editing. Lastly, if you’re prone to shooting at high ISO settings due to challenging light conditions, raw files allow superior noise reduction without compromising detail.

Carstens concludes the discussion with a newer alternative—Canon’s “C-Raw,” a compressed raw format balancing image quality and manageable file sizes. For Nikon, Sony, Fuji, and Olympus users, various compressed raw options are available within camera settings to mitigate storage concerns without significantly compromising image integrity. Check out the video above for the full rundown from Carstens.