Still Trying to Convince Myself on RAW

Started Jun 29, 2013 | Photos thread
OP Gary Eickmeier Veteran Member • Posts: 3,479
Re: Still Trying to Convince Myself on RAW

thebustos wrote:

I think you're looking at it wrong. Jpeg and raw aren't simply different types of files independent of each other. The jpeg is the processed raw file. The raw file retains all of the photo information so that you have better control over things like white balance, brightness, contrast, etc... The raw file is better in that you have more flexibility over the final outcome than you do with a jpeg. You can process a raw file to look like the out of camera jpeg, but you can't undo that processing to make a jpeg into a raw. So the real question is which is better for you from a work flow stand point. If you don't want to do much to an image once you shoot it, then jpeg is fine. If you want to process everything yourself, then shoot only raw. If you don't want to do much to your photos, but want to be able to fix things if need be, shoot raw + jpeg... I look at the raw as a digital "negative"...

I would do any amount of work on a file to make it look better. The question is, will all of that work on RAW really result in something visibly better.

And no, the RAW file was not created without the WB and exposure settings you put into the camera. It doesn't contain the Scene settings, if any, or the lens corrections, or sharpening and noise reduction, but it is not a TOTALLY unprocessed "negative" like in the good old film days.

-- hide signature --

Gary Eickmeier

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