Re: RAW vs JPG?
- From: Richard.Polhill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 03:14:04 -0800 (PST)
On 7 Dec, 10:19, Joel <J...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Joel <J...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Scott W <biph...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I shoot nothing butraw, I find the workflow to be easier withraw
no point in using anything other thanRAW
BesidesJPGlooses information every time it is saved.
It is the loss of imformation the first time the image is saved as
jpeg (or tiff for that matter) that worries me the most.
The small losses when minor edits are nothing to worry much about and
since I keep myrawimage I can aways go back to therawversion and
start fresh. There are some cases where I will use 16 bit/color tiff
in my workflow, but this is very rare, mostly it goes right fromraw
Me? I shoot bothRAWandJPG, and what worry me the most not aboutJPGbut
theRAWconverter can mess up myJPG<bg>. AndRAWonly shooter ain't
impressed me much (or any?) <bg>
Also, I do bothRAWandJPGbecause I want to learn more aboutRAWnot
that I can't live withoutRAW. Matter fact, after several years working
withRAWI still have mixed feeling (not about whatRAWcan do, but whatRAW
can destroy) aboutRAW, and all retouch for printing still have to go
throughJPGfor final exam and fine tuning.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Joel, once again you show that your grasp of the subject is as good as
your grasp of the language.
- Prev by Date: Re: RAW vs JPG?
- Next by Date: Re: printer
- Previous by thread: Re: RAW vs JPG?
- Next by thread: Re: RAW vs JPG?