POLL: How often do you shoot raw images?

Started May 1, 2014 | Polls thread
phototransformations Senior Member • Posts: 2,834
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

Sure. These are 100% crops from a series of shots I took with my Samsung EX1 that convinced me to go from being a JPEG shooter to a RAW shooter. By the way, I haven't noticed any combative RAW proponents in this thread, though there were a couple of combative posts from the "other side."

JPEG, ISO 800, 100% crop


RAW via ACR defaults


The differences in detail are much clearer in the originals. At ISO 800, fine detail is smeared in the JPEGs and saturation lost. Not so in the RAW.

For low-ISO shots in lighting that's not difficult, I don't see much advantage to shooting RAW. But at higher ISOs, with more difficult light, or when an error in settings has been made, RAW makes enough of a difference to me to be worth the small cost of extra storage and slower write times in burst mode.


 phototransformations's gear list:phototransformations's gear list
Samsung TL500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +24 more
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