Should I go RAW only?

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
Charles2
Senior MemberPosts: 2,246
Like?
Re: What?
In reply to knickerhawk, 11 months ago

knickerhawk wrote:

Charles2 wrote:

Depending on the camera, the camera JPG may be good for many uses yet difficult to duplicate. Even the software from many camera manufacturers does not duplicate the JPG; the camera JPG recipe is apparently regarded as a secret sauce.

Which camera companies and which cameras produce noticeably different jpegs compared to processing the image in their proprietary raw converters (with same settings as in-camera)? It makes no sense to me that camera companies would deliberately handicap their proprietary raw processing software. What's the upside to that?

By the way, I can personally attest that it's not true for Nikon and Olympus raw processing software.

Pentax, Fuji, Olympus (for an EP1), Sigma.

The computer-based programs from the camera manufacturers are free, so revenue from them is not an issue.

We could speculate why; for example, are techniques hidden in camera firmware that would be easier to disassemble from a computer program? The fact remains that many users note the difference.

The fudge factor is "noticeably different." Agreed, the difference is often not much.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
LazyNew
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(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