Who uses the OOC JPG's ?

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
Gourownway Forum Member • Posts: 75
Re: Who uses the OOC JPG's ?

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

Gourownway wrote:

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

Gourownway wrote:

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

Gnine wrote:

victorav wrote:

Gnine wrote:

Panasonic shooter, and I use them a LOT. The G9 jpeg engine is a huge update over the previous models/versions. I'm one of those weirdos who actually likes the more realistic colours of the Panasonic flavour, and I actually started a thread a while back on this exact subject. With examples too. I'll have a look and see if I can dig it up. One of the the main reason too, why I like Silkypix, as it can reproduce the EXACT same colours and contrast etc from raw, as the in camera converter.

Why are you a weird for liking Panasonic colors? I've so many images/videos from Panasonic cameras they are quite good with pleasing colors.

Because we're in the Olymp, ooops, OM, ooops m4/3 forum. Everyone knows that Olymp, ooops, I mean OMD jpeg colours come straight from the hand of Jesus. It's almost disrespectful to like Panasonic colour

i see shooting jpg as going to McDonalds and ordering a salad

Are you just trying to be provocative? What do you get when you process a raw file , usually a jpg ? Welcome to McDonalds

this whole thread is provocative and as usual the jpg shooters coming across as the pushy ones, a raw file has more information so more flexible for editing

i would be cautious about polar stereotyping people into groups, and equally attempting to suggest a self a riotousness based on your perceptions of others.

You may have seen I previously have commented that raw files do indeed have more data , even if you can’t actually see it. It is also true that you can rescue a raw file that is , for example, poorly exposed much more than you can a jpg.

however if you do correctly expose a jpg , it will be indistinguishable from a processed raw file if you have set up your camera to not overly sharpen etc.

Raw is fine if you like to fiddle with files and add your own interpretation with, for example colour enhancement , or balance the exposure on a high contrast image. When you are done and you export , it’s still a jpg, and has no more merit that one cooked in your camera. It may even less consistent if part of a set.

it’s also easy to overlook how skilled some jpg shooters are in matters of the art and craft of photography . As were film photographers using slide film with less latitude than many modern jpgs have . That is photographic accomplishment. On the other hand is is easy to say, I shoot raw, to parody a well known utuber.

well you're the one who has said a youtuber said to be a proper photographer you need to shoot raw, so no stereotyping.....

citing one person is not stereo typing , it’s an example

Correctly exposed jpg, what is that exactly? Is there an industry standard or something that describes that?

same with raw files, hence the software updates for each new camera. However it’s not difficult for those which a sincere interest to find out.

A raw file has more data, we are using a digital format regardless of file type, because of this it has more flexibility for editing meaning the data for the final jpg can show what exactly what you want it to show because you are not limited by the file type and bit depth

using third party software and dragging sliders about is not my idea of photography, if you get things right in camera( assuming you have read the manual and know how to) will give you excellent and consistent results.

film is irrelevant in this conversation

not for you to decide, it’s an example of a means to capture an image and those who understood and knows how to use it, also know that you needed to get it right , are very close to , in camera .

the longest part of raw editing for myself is waiting for the noise reduction software to do its thing, once again fiddling with raw files....oh the stereotyping.... always the same these threads

its a bold effort to not accept responsibility and displace blame on others. I have concluded that you have nothing to offer other than your barely passive aggression, and condescension of others because you are deluded enough to believe your are more enlightened .

the computer says no is hardly witty , another device that does not understand social relations .

I will not reply further because you have rendered the discussion empty by substituting your ego for a good argument.

-- hide signature --

the computer says no

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow