RAW versus JPEG -- again

Started May 26, 2009 | Discussions thread
Ionian Senior Member • Posts: 1,271
Re: RAW versus JPEG -- again


Obviously you've never had to shoot and print pictures of 300 kids in
a row sitting on Santa's lap in 4 hours for a corporate holiday party
that you were hired for.

That's cool if you want to spend time on each individual raw as the
line of parents back up and half of them end up leaving with crying
children because you didn't get everyone's photo because each photo
of a child is special and deserves individual attention. That's just
you. And only you - trust me.


You are correct - I don't take pictures of kids.
I have no interest in that kinda thing.


But some people have to since it's no less a legitimate job then shooting fine art sunsets or glamour photos. You found a workflow that fits whatever job you were hired to do. Don't make it sound like that anyone else who has to do the same is any less of a photographer or doesn't care about their product.

Being a pro isn't about shooting with a D3x over a d90 or using RAW over jpeg, it's about looking at the current job you've been handed and figuring out what compromises are needed to complete the job competently in the time alloted.

There are plenty of jobs where shooting jpeg isn't a choice but a necessity. It doesn't make that person any less of a photographer.

'...For every man who has ever lived, in this universe, there shines a star.'
-Arthur C. Clarke

Why is it that the people with the biggest and most conspicuous watermarks have the photos least worth stealing?

I instantly disregard any thread or poster that use the words 'Tack Sharp'.

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