I Will Not Shot in RAW

Started May 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
robert1955
Senior MemberPosts: 1,774
Like?
Re: RAW is not Future Proof...
In reply to Marco Nero, May 24, 2013

Marco Nero wrote:

...

To quote another website:

which?

now abbreviated:

".... could doom the file type(s) to obsolescence. Unfortunately, this could also mean .....It is possible .... There also exists the possibility t.

Many point

Who?

out that UNLESS .... may find someday that you will never be able to open them again because RAW is not "Future Proof".

So far only FUD for that

Ten years ago I would argue that RAW would be the superior file for capturing certain types of images but not now.

What we are trying to do is capture what we can see with our eyes... using a digital camera.  Our eyes have more Dynamic Range than any camera available today although

Actually, I doubt that very much. Most what we think of a seeing is actually heavy processing in the brain.

With cameras producing accurate JPEG images that closely resemble what we see, there's no need to worry about "what might be lost" if you choose not to photograph in RAW.  If your JPEG is missing information, you'll know about it because your images will be lacking in some way visually.  If you can't tell, then you won't miss anything shooting in JPEG.

Technically speaking, a RAW image is simply a filetype and is NOT a photograph or even an Image file.

Though RAW is not a file type. If you have a programme that can open it, you can view it as an image. A JPG is really no different in that respect.

The scary thing about RAW is that each camera manufacturer has its own propriety native RAW File and camera software from one manufacturer will often not be able to read RAW files from another camera brand.  In the past Adobe and other software companies have elected to completely discontinue access and service to some of the now defunct types of RAW files.  It has happened before so we know it may happen again.

Show us, I've never encountered that problem

How many times do we see threads by people here complaining that their version of Photoshop or Lightroom doesn't support the RAW files from their new camera?  Eventually, these companies will allow you to access your camera's RAW files but you need to wait for RAW pluggins and conversion software to become available first.

That is not about not being future proof. There has never been a camera that was not from the start at least supported by its own maker.

JPEG and TIF, on the other hand, are considered to be "universal" image formats. Sure, JPEG is a lossy file that is compressed... but most people saving a RAW file to work on it later will use PSD (Photoshop Document) or TIF (Tagged Image Format) to store their "works in progress" for archiving processes.

There are over 254 types of RAW image format files in existence with many of them being subset formats of the same type.

You are repetitive

RAW may even be abandoned some day and there's ample evident to support this hypothesis.

Again, show us

So be careful in the format you choose to save, use or capture your images in.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with capturing or storing your photographs as RAW files.  But it would be prudent to edit every single picture and convert them all into TIFs if you are trying to archive your photography.

You could also take the approach that as if and when a probelem were to occur in accessing files [which also may happen with JPG or TIF] it will not happen overnight. If such a cataclysmic event were to happen, you may have bigger problem than your photo files.

Plenty of photographers believe they need to shoot RAW but don't know how to make the most of converting their files.  Even less people have the correctly calibrated professional monitors or the eye and professional skills to manipulate their images correctly in the first place.  On such people, shooting in RAW is almost certainly a waste of time.

There is no such thing as one correct version of a photo. If the user is happy with the results that's OK, if he learns to improve his processing that is better. It is not obligatory, so if you don't care for it: don't.

Today's JPEG Engines from the modern Canon digital cameras make the most of the RAW information before converting the image into a JPEG image file. All that Dynamic Range and subtle detail hidden in shadows and highlights is carefully extracted and introduced into the final image.

That is assuming there is only one way to interpret a scene. RAW gives you more latitude than JPG

The modern camera's Image Processor is much more capable than the collective skills of the vast majority of budding photography enthusiasts out there.

We could go one step further: the full auto mode in current cameras is "much more capable than the collective skills of the vast majority of budding photography enthusiasts out there".
I love those absolute voice of authority statements.

Enjoy your photography, no matter what format you shoot in.

Indeed, but don't use FUD

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