What's with All These Proprietary Fake Video RAWs? BRAW, ProResRAW, ZRAW?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Dericali Regular Member • Posts: 201
Re: What's with All These Proprietary Fake Video RAWs? BRAW, ProResRAW, ZRAW?

Markr041 wrote:

Dericali wrote:

Nice try. The lazy way out. If you want to believe that BRAW is superior in flexibility and quality compared to true RAW, it is clear who is in the world of fantasy.

Do you really think anyone is going to discuss anything with you online when you ooze condescension?

I agree with you that we want to be polite and impersonal. But the response you quoted from me was in direct response to a poster who claimed I was in a fantasy world! I could have turned my cheek, I guess. It is not condescending; however, it is impolite, a counterpunch to a rude remark. Read OZRay's posts; they are condescending (and misleading).

Here is one of his statements:

“BRAW is a true RAW format, it's just that there is some processing done in-camera. You can adjust WB, ISO and many other parameters in post without any issue.”

And here is your response:

“And of course you can adjust BRAW in post. That is true of compressed jpegs too, and we all know how that goes. If you depart from the baked in colors or WB, you get artifacts. No one is claiming you cannot adjust BRAW, or jpegs or AVCHD for that matter, in post. But you cannot easily eliminate the extra camera sharpening in post or the loss of detail from the extra noise reduction that BRAW imposes in-camera.”

So are you claiming he is wrong, and adjusting  WB in BRAW does result in artefacts? Or are you only talking about sharpening and noise reduction being baked in?

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow