Curiosity only: If we could print a RAW file, would it look better then a printed JPEG file?

Started Feb 16, 2013 | Discussions thread
HumanTarget
Contributing MemberPosts: 628
Like?
Re: Curiosity only: If we could print a RAW file, would it look better then a printed JPEG file?
In reply to apaflo, Feb 19, 2013

apaflo wrote:

Actually the lumber/house analogy is a very good one. Another is a kitchen pantry with the ingredients to make soup. That does not constitute a bowl of soup. A cook can whip out chicken soup, bean soup, noodle soup, etc etc.

The fact is that a raw file does not contain an image.

Actually, that's not true.  A raw file literally contains an image (or more), as they contain one or more JPEG's for preview/playback.

But that "standard" definition chooses, arbitrarily, just one of the nearly infinite number of possible images. It does not necessarily choose the desired image.

What you are describing isn't anything different that just shooting JPEG. But as you well know there is a significant percentage of high end photography done by photographers who refuse to shoot JPEG. It isn't necessary, but it certainly can be useful.

It's not arbitrary, it's based on your in-camera settings.  And yes, what I'm describing is exactly the same as shooting JPEG.  It's not practical, and I never said it would be.  I'm just saying it's not impossible, either.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow