It's not that RAW makes better pictures than jpeg but...

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
Flat view
Trevor Carpenter
Trevor Carpenter Forum Pro • Posts: 15,600
It's not that RAW makes better pictures than jpeg but...

This is a line from another post on this forum

"JPEG IQ is fantastic, no much need for RAW anymore"

I just don't get this. I was always led to believe that a primary reason for using RAW was to provide much more scope for editing not that raw pictures in themselves were better than the jpegs.

If you take a very good jpeg then that doesn't mean that you won't want to enhance it and make an already good picture better. If you are going to do that then going back to my original premise you are theoretically better off having a RAW original rather than a jpeg. In which case I believe the quote becomes "RAW is such a good canvas, not much need for jpegs anymore".

When we say jpegs have improved that doesn't make any difference to the fact that if you are going to edit, you will normally (not always) find that you are less likely to damage a RAW file than a jpeg.

Is my logic wrong?

-- hide signature --

Recent and not so recent pictures here

 Trevor Carpenter's gear list:Trevor Carpenter's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 O.I.S +1 more
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow