Do I really need Raw

Started Apr 3, 2014 | Discussions thread
Darrell Spreen Forum Pro • Posts: 10,455
Here's the problem

phototransformations wrote:

I spent about an hour "tuning" Adobe Camera Raw to each of my cameras, for each ISO. Once that "tuning" has been done, after that, I consistently get better images in ACR than the JPEGs out of the camera, and I can also fine-tune images in Camera Raw if necessary. Doing things like, for instance, raise the shadows, as you have done in Photoscape in your sample image, is no harder than doing it in Photoscape.

It's not a matter of doing post-processing, since I do that with JPEGs.  (Not much point in comparing processed raw files with ooc JPEGs -- they all need post-processing).

As we know, different raw converters can produce distinctly different results (lots of comparative reviews).  DPP is what I need for my primary cameras (Canon DSLRs) and reviews I have read indicate it is superior for those cameras in color accuracy, noise, and sharpening without artifacts.  But it doesn't work with my Panasonic, Ricoh, or Olympus files.  I don't want to have to switch between different processors for each camera.

So I prefer JPEGs from all the cameras and then use the same image editor.  I don't need to learn several converters (you'll pardon me if I say I detest Adobe) and I have "fine-tuned" my camera options so that I get good consistency among all the cameras I use.

The bottom line is that it's just a matter of personal preference and workflow.

-- hide signature --


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