POLL: How often do you shoot raw images?

Started May 1, 2014 | Polls thread
sherman_levine Forum Pro • Posts: 10,954
Re: POLL: How often do you shoot raw images?

djddpr wrote:


My oh my. In a photography forum, so many verbal arguments submitted as evidence for jpg vs. raw and so little photographic evidence submitted. Of the 80 posts proceeding this post, only three people have submitted photographic evidence: Nick (Gardenersassistant) with his multiple jpg vs. raw comparisons, Carl English, and myself. So many words, sentences, and paragraphs rather than photographs. In a photography forum?! There is even submitted a recorded music mp3 vs flac analogy as evidence for jpg vs raw. In a photography forum?!

I have asked Gardnersassistant a question about his jpg vs. raw comparisons. When he kindly responds, I will attempt to make my summation of the photographic evidence.

In recent years I have heard (too) many observations about proponents of raw -- that they have a tendency to elitism, supremicism, or a "holier than thou" attitude and also that they have a tendency to combativeness. I have no objection to elitism -- I have and can easily peacefully coexist with elitists. It is elitists' tendency to combativeness to which I object, especially when their combativeness is unsolicited and aimed at me. To be quite candid, I grow weary of combative raw proponents treating me as a religious infidel.

It is long past due time for proponents of raw to drop their verbal arguments and submit photographic evidence. The same should also be said for proponents of jpg. I am willing to analyze and believe the photographic evidence submitted. Also, I am prepared to conclude that, if insufficient photographic evidence is submitted, then there is insufficient merit to that position; and I shall act accordingly.

If we stick to submitting and analyzing photographic evidence, I believe that the results will be valuable to photographers. I intend to participate further in submitting photographic evidence.

Attention combative raw proponents: Respond to this post with photographic evidence only or be gone.

David Dollevoet

Nothing posted in this thread because the advantages are pretty much "old news" for those who (IMHO appropriately) find them useful. Here's one example.


For your properly-exposed ISO 200 images, the Raw vs JPG discussion is of course moot.  Nobody's arguing that one is better than the other in that setting. Indeed, you've chosen in-camera  setup values for your JPGs which minimize the camera's processing, precisely for the same reason that some of use Raw. That approach works for your images, but not for others such as the example in my link above

 sherman_levine's gear list:sherman_levine's gear list
Panasonic FZ1000 Nikon Coolpix P900 Panasonic FZ80/FZ82
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(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