LostPatrol. Your working method more or less mirrors the way in which I work, just getting into using DVD as opposed to CDR for backup purposes ( one DVD for use, one securely stored away ). If anyone needs convincing of the advantages of RAW I can only suggest they take the same shot as a JPEG and a RAW image, open PS or whatever package you use and see just how much adjustment flexability you have with the RAW image. My own findings are that whilst the mid tones might not show a significant advantage the detail that can be retained in the highlight and shadow areas will show the RAW image advantages, the shadows in particular remain clean with no colour casts ( as used to be seen in underexposed colour negative material ). The ability to fine tune the colour temperature post capture is a major plus to achieving an end result that matches what you saw at the time of taking the image. I personally could not accept the fact that the camera was making decisions about what and how much information to discard when shooting a JPEG image. neverfinder. My photographic background is based around a wet black and white darkroom and shooting colour transparencies, moving to digital imaging my computer adjustments are limited to what I would have done in a wet darkroom, i.e shading and burning in, adjusting the brightness to suite and adjusting the contrast all techniques but now instead of using my hands I use the mouse, I do not use any of the more involved PS techniques because at the time of taking the image I have the finished image already visualised in my head. This is not to imply a critism of those who make full use of of PS but just my rather traditional approach ( I am old ! )