Why you should shoot RAW: an example

Started Feb 13, 2009 | Discussions thread
OP Docno Veteran Member • Posts: 4,874
Dayo...

Dayo wrote:

What we have is a shot straight out of the camera being compared to a
post processed shot. It shows a few areas blown out which can be
recovered easily as I showed. There has been some suggestion about
extra shadows on walls which I can't see in the first place but
assuming they are there as claimed I wouldn't pin the RAW argument on
them.

Very strange that you cannot see the shadows that I'm referring to... Here is the same converted shot with the shadow edges outlined. Below it, for your convenience, is the converted shot with no outlines. The shadows are pretty obvious on my screen in the converted shot, but almost completely gone in the in-camera jpeg.

Let me also state that the shadows in this case are not critical for this image (I started out by saying this was just some shooting about with a new camera/lens combo, and I recognise it is not an 'artistic' shot). But if an irretrievable difference can be seen here, it will also apply to more impressive shots. -Glenn

-- hide signature --

Galleries: http://picasaweb.google.com.au/glennjude
Sony A700, KM 11-18mm, CZ16-80mm, SAL70-300mm G, SAL18-250mm, 50mm F1.4

 Docno's gear list:Docno's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R II Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G SSM Sony 135mm F1.8 ZA Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow