UHH has a significant proportion of aging people, particularly retired men who are accustomed to having positions of respect and authority and now have suddenly been put out to pasture and deprived of the status they once enjoyed. They now find themselves at loose ends, useless, slowing down physically, and often in pain. They may not be as mentally sharp as they once were, and they can become angry, bitter and resentful.



Well, at least that describes me.

Mike

I don’t believe that there is any one way to process a raw file. So we can’t give you a set sequence of steps for your images. If there were such a thing it would probably be built into the post processing software so that everyone would get perfect images and you would only be doing small tweaks to them.

Modern cameras produce pretty good jpgs as long as you get the exposure fairly close. Where raw processing shines is in a situation where the dynamic range of the scene is too close to the camera’s limit or a camera setting gets bumped or a subject is backlit or some other non-optimal conditions. For most people these things occur only occasionally. But some of us use raw as insurance because raw Processing can handle more extreme situations than jpgs. It’s not always necessary, but it’s nice to have the option.

"Most modern cameras......!" Interesting comment as I can recite a situation that I encountered in 2001 (I recall the date exactly as it was just before 9/11). We were on a trip and a fellow traveler had an early Sony, I believe it was, and in the photo he later emailed to some of us the blue sky was clearly divided into sections that were almost exactly the look of painting by the numbers. Obviously, the algorithms that are used now are vastly better but we need to acknowledge that JPGs are lossy, compressed images and that RAW has all the info from scratch. Since most cameras can capture JPG and RAW simultaneously that can offer a way out of the dilemma.

This whole discussion reminds me of discussions we used to have back in the 20th century when you could take along slides and/or prints to the local camera club and have someone 'judge' them. Some would be 'wonderful' photos to one or two people, while others would be 'failures' to an equal number of people. Opinions might change if the judge shared or didn't share your view. The same kind of discussion probably went on way back when it was a choice between color or black and white, or between sepia or not sepia. Maybe even plate or film. Certainly went on with slides or prints. And let's not forget the debates about which kind of film was 'best.'
For most people, jpeg is going to be the 'best' option, because it is relatively easy to do, and is handled by the camera. RAW is better for other people, especially if you like 'manipulating' images.

So, let's just accept the disagreement, but recognize the right of others to disagree with whatever I say? Or whatever photo I produce. At the end of the day, it is all art, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder!