Re: Should a newbie start shooting RAW?
- From: bugbear <bugbear@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 09:44:46 +0100
Annika1980 wrote:
On May 30, 2:53 pm, "STEVE" <S...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:I would'nt bother with RAW if you are just getting into it. I know about 4
people that always go on about the benefits of RAW and to be honest with
you they spend all their time fiddling about with an image, without
actually ever getting an image that they are satisfied with.
So would they be satisfied just shooting JPGs?
I would answer your question like this:
Shoot RAW if you care about getting the best quality you can from your
images.
If you don't then JPG is for you. Enjoy your Nikon.
Which sounds rhetorically convincing.
But if "the best quality" (call it 100% quality)
takes ten times more time/effort/risk of failure
than 95% quality, one has to question it.
Diminishing returns is a force to be reckoned with
in many fields of endeavour.
BugBear
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should a newbie start shooting RAW?
- From: Scott W
- Re: Should a newbie start shooting RAW?
- References:
- Should a newbie start shooting RAW?
- From: ole kvaal
- Re: Should a newbie start shooting RAW?
- From: STEVE
- Re: Should a newbie start shooting RAW?
- From: Annika1980
- Should a newbie start shooting RAW?
- Prev by Date: Re: Do you set your camera at high resolution?
- Next by Date: Re: Playing with polarisers- color effects
- Previous by thread: Re: Should a newbie start shooting RAW?
- Next by thread: Re: Should a newbie start shooting RAW?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|