RAW Troublemaker Again

Started Aug 30, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
JamieTux Veteran Member • Posts: 3,900
Re: RAW Troublemaker Again
1

Chet Meyerson wrote:

Gary,

I'M WITH YOU!

You knew you were asking for trouble when you started this thread. I don't shoot RAW and I certainly can on my a77 and my a99. The RAW fanatics on this forum really show their ignorance to the JPEG format-of today.

Years ago we had to shoot RAW to avoid the JPEG artifacts that came along with the compression. But those days are over...long gone. Not only have the JPEG compression algorithms improved, but IMHO no software can correct in camera problems better than the manufacture can with hard coded corrections in the camera! I just get a huge kick watching all 3 of my Sony products do that magic. You know, that split second you see the 'raw' image before it gets corrected right after you take the picture. Pure magic!

This is a very weird and skewed argument! The raw file contains much more information than the jpeg, regardless of compression.  The draws are 14 or 12 bit colour depth files for a start instead of the 8 bit that jpeg allows.  If you want the same corrections as the camera does then use the Sony software that came free with your camera and get the same result if you can't improve on it yourself.

The point I am making here is that the jpeg cannot be better than the raw!

So, I've learned my lesson with the people on this forum (and that a kind way of putting it) and don't ever get involved with such topics...you will never get answer, only biased opinions.

OH, yes the JPEG image is far superior to the RAW image in your example. Anytime you shoot both, the comparison is valid. How could it not be? Identical exposures, one processed one not! Could be a lousy picture but so what. We all take good one and lousy ones!!!

Chet

It's not valid for the reason I just gave, the raw is just that, an unprocessed raw data set that you can cook or develop into an image, if on a particular image you want "in camera" processing then run it through the Sony software and you'll get the same result.

So in which way is the raw file inferior?

I'm not trying to say that you personally should shoot raw or pretend that the Sony raw converter is a great solution if you always want to end up with Sony jpegs.  Just that the jpeg is never "better" than the raw in case other people read this thread and get swayed by your incorrect understanding.

 JamieTux's gear list:JamieTux's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon 1 J5 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G Nikon 1 Nikkor 18.5mm f/1.8 Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 PD-Zoom +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
tom
tom
(unknown member)
tom
tom
tom
tko
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow