Using the Embedded JPEG from SRW files

So after reading this post , I got to thinking about the JPEG file embedded in SRW files.

Sometimes I just don't need/want to go through the effort of a full PP workflow for some shots so I'm fine with just using a JPEG the way the camera formatted it. I set my NX500 to RAW+Super Fine for some shots at a racetrack today, and when I got home I tried running some comparisons between the JPEG that the camera made (hereafter referred to as the "normal" JPEG) vs. the JPEG I extracted from the SRW using this tool (hereafter referred to as the "embedded" JPEG).

So, from a pure file format perspective the only difference I can see is some EXIF information is missing and the DPI is slightly lower in the embedded JPEG (350DPI vs 300DPI, resulting in a slightly smaller file). Like, that's it. The colour grading seems the same, the actual dimensions of the file are the same (though the larger DPI file is slightly bigger on disk), everything seems like they go through the exact same process upon creation.

The dedicated JPEG the camera generates (my apologies for the focus issues; not really a pro at action shooting yet):

JPEG created at NX500's "Superfine" quality alongside a RAW

...and now for the embedded JPEG:

JPEG extracted from the SRW RAW file

To my non-pixel-peeping-experienced eye, these look pretty bloody similar. That missing 50DPI isn't going to make much difference in my life, and knowing that could always just extract a fully-processed JPEG from a SRW file with a couple of clicks is tremendously appealing (both from a storage space perspective and also a file-management perspective - one file to worry about instead of two, though Lightroom does make managing these scenarios easier).

Can anyone let me know if they think I'll run into problems in future if I go this route? Thanks!

...and just for the sake of completeness, the Lightroom-converted JPEG that comes from the SRW file.

Slight crop, a touch darker than the first two, and an almost 50% increase in file size with lower DPI? Whatever.

Interestingly, the DPI drops to 240 (when exported at 100% JPEG quality) and something else is going on too... I didn't manually apply the 50-200mm lens profile in LR6, but still the image has slightly reduced distortion and is a touch darker than the other two JPEGs. I've got plenty to learn about Lightroom yet.  

I am in no way or means a professional. With that being said here is a horse. 🐎

What I can tell you is that shooting a RAW and converting to jpeg will give you a 100% cleaner shot than shooting a jpg and then editing. If you are someone who will take shots and post to instagram then go ahead and keep that raw and jpg and post the jpg but I'd you're looking to print and hang pics go with RAW, edit in LR and then convert to jpg. Think of it this way. RAW shots are a massive blob of memory that will allow you to edit in a 100% broad spectrum. Jpg is a compressed shot that will compress that blob of memory to begin with. If you edit you will have to compress another time. All that compressing will deteriorate you're photo so if you zoom in it'll show pixelation

🐎🐎🐎💨💨💨