Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
ALL digital cameras shoot in RAW......
Page 1 of 5 next> last>>
Jul 13, 2014 20:22:12   #
Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!
 
Agree or disagree and state reason if you wish?

Reply
Jul 13, 2014 20:27:59   #
davidheald1942 Loc: Mars (the planet)
 
Is that a question, or a statement?
ronny

Racmanaz wrote:
Agree or disagree and state reason if you wish?

Reply
Jul 13, 2014 20:32:31   #
Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!
 
davidheald1942 wrote:
Is that a question, or a statement?
ronny


The title is in a statement form concluded with a question. So I guess it's both :)

Reply
 
 
Jul 13, 2014 20:38:26   #
letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.
 
All digital cameras shoot in raw, but not all save in raw. Raw is what the sensor sees and sends to the image processor.

Reply
Jul 13, 2014 20:47:18   #
Erik_H Loc: Denham Springs, Louisiana
 
Technically, they all shoot in raw. Most point and shoot and some bridge cameras then process the image and compress it into a jpeg then discard the raw data.

Reply
Jul 13, 2014 21:42:40   #
Rongnongno Loc: FL
 
Erik_H wrote:
Technically, they all shoot in raw. Most point and shoot and some bridge cameras then process the image and compress it into a jpeg then discard the raw data.
And if they were offering the raw files clients would get really upset seeing the real size of the sensor and its meager capabilities.

Reply
Jul 13, 2014 22:11:41   #
Erik_H Loc: Denham Springs, Louisiana
 
Rongnongno wrote:
And if they were offering the raw files clients would get really upset seeing the real size of the sensor and its meager capabilities.


:thumbup: True.

Reply
 
 
Jul 13, 2014 22:24:21   #
tramsey Loc: Texas
 
Today wasn't entirely a bust. I learned something new, thanks for the lesson.

Reply
Jul 13, 2014 22:32:27   #
mechengvic Loc: SoCalo
 
Racmanaz wrote:
Agree or disagree and state reason if you wish?


Is that kind of like: If a tree falls in the forest, and there's no in-camera processor to process it, does it still make a RAW???

Reply
Jul 14, 2014 00:20:27   #
amehta Loc: Boston
 
mechengvic wrote:
Is that kind of like: If a tree falls in the forest, and there's no in-camera processor to process it, does it still make a RAW???

The tree makes a noise, and the camera produces raw sensor data. Neither is a mystery. :-D

Reply
Jul 14, 2014 00:34:06   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
Ditto:
letmedance wrote:
All digital cameras shoot in raw, but not all save in raw. Raw is what the sensor sees and sends to the image processor.

Reply
 
 
Jul 14, 2014 01:31:30   #
mechengvic Loc: SoCalo
 
amehta wrote:
The tree makes a noise, and the camera produces raw sensor data. Neither is a mystery. :-D


Not a mystery but certainly a question that can have two answers. If a sound is defined as pressure waves caused by forces at work then yes, it makes a sound. If a sound is defined as something that is heard, if the auditory perception and translation of those same pressure waves is defined as a sound, then no, it does not makes a sound.

If "shoot in raw" means produce raw data, then yes all cameras do. If "shoot in raw" means produce a usable raw file, then no, not all do.

All cameras produce raw data, not all cameras produce a usable raw file.

Reply
Jul 14, 2014 01:56:12   #
amehta Loc: Boston
 
mechengvic wrote:
Not a mystery but certainly a question that can have two answers. If a sound is defined as pressure waves caused by forces at work then yes, it makes a sound. If a sound is defined as something that is heard, if the auditory perception and translation of those same pressure waves is defined as a sound, then no, it does not makes a sound.

If "shoot in raw" means produce raw data, then yes all cameras do. If "shoot in raw" means produce a usable raw file, then no, not all do.

All cameras produce raw data, not all cameras produce a usable raw file.
Not a mystery but certainly a question that can ha... (show quote)

Time for semantic silliness. :-)

Reply
Jul 14, 2014 01:57:30   #
mechengvic Loc: SoCalo
 
amehta wrote:
Time for semantic silliness. :-)


I'm pretty sure that was the purpose of this thread...

Reply
Jul 14, 2014 01:57:46   #
Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!
 
amehta wrote:
Time for semantic silliness. :-)


Now you know why I didn't respond to it lol

Reply
Page 1 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.