Why you should shoot RAW: an example

Started Feb 13, 2009 | Discussions thread
WaltKnapp Forum Pro • Posts: 13,857
Re: Congratulations about your finding and decision

DaddyBit wrote:

The debate about RAW vs JPG has no sense. RAW is the way to go for
the serious work. Period.

And if you are shooting hundreds to thousands of shots a day in your pro work making a living at it? Then you do shoot jpeg, shot exactly right to feed the printer.

Yes the debate makes no sense, especially as it's 99% ego. Guess what I respect someone who cannot shoot quality jpegs right out of the camera and has to rely on RAW to rescue them far less. I respect the artists who shoot perfect jpegs all the time a whole lot.

In my lib I have RAWs made in early 2006. Still return to some of
them to make JPG conversion using modern sophisticated conversion
algorithms and my improved PP skills. So I am happy that I started
shooting RAW from the very first digital frame.

Fifteen years ago when I started with DSLR I shot only RAW, because that's all there was. I'm now working my way through the first ten years of my shooting converting those RAWs to a workable format while Minolta's software still works. I will not be caught like that again.

And guess what? For a good ten years before I shot DSLR I scanned slides. The scans were never RAW, but I learned in depth how to use Photoshop to improve them. The same thing works with jpegs, they do not have to be a final product out of the camera, though unlike RAW they can be. So you can archive the original jpegs too, and return to them over and over with new software toys. It's really foolish to think you cannot pp jpegs.

Walt

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