do you loose quality while converting to JPEG?

[Mitchell]

well ive been looking at some of my picture that i shot in jpeg and they seem better then my raw "after converting" so i was woundering if i sould just shoot jpeg till i get a better program? i dont edit my photos in raw anyway.

[Bonish Photo]

Edit your raw photos and then see if you can tell a differance. If I open a image in CS3 Raw, then convert it to jpeg, I can tell a huge difference over the jpeg alone version. Plus the RAW converter gives you so many more ways to adjust the shot I almost shoot exclusively in RAW just to have those adjustments.

My camera will allow me to shoot in both raw and jpeg. I keep the small jpeg as a reference, and if the shot is spot on out of the camera, then I just use that one to email, or post, but if I want to fool around with it or use it for real...what ever that means...then I use the raw image as the base.

[Tusker]

Could the above be the biggest reason for shooting raw? I started using jpeg because it seemed most people had trouble opening anything else. The above as written seems to say if you plan on printing it, go the TIFF route. ??

[peter nap]

Not that I'm anything close to an expert....The printer that does my large prints, (White House) only accepts Jpegs.

I save the RAW as a master. All changes are TIFF's until It's ready to go to them, then I convert to Jpeg in PS saving it in the highest image quality. My pictures are so bad, I haven't noticed any quality issues