Wrong again. You clearly have no understanding of the advantages of raw. Post-processing raw is not about rescuing poorly exposed and composed images, although it can do that to a certain degree. It's primarily used to take well exposed and well-composed images to the next level. That is why most professional and advanced amateur photographers shoot in raw and post process.

In years past the number of pro level software products available was limited and fairly expensive, often with a very steep learning curve. They were professional level tools primarily used by professionals and advanced amateurs.

Today post-processing tools from a large number of publishers abound. They are inexpensive and accessible to anyone at any level of experience. Like any tools they can be used properly or they can be abused. Unfortunately, a large number of people who use these tools do not understand how to use them properly to get the best out of them, and are often poor photographers as well. This results in overly processed messes.

However, a well exposed and well-composed image processed in good quality software by somebody who is skilled in its use and who understands the components of a good photograph, will result in a superior image.

The frequent discussions (arguments?) about shooting raw vs. jpg leave me confused. The following is about image processing ONLY and assumes the photographer is able to compose and set exposure to properly capture an image ("get it right") - both of which are skills unrelated to whether one shoots raw or jpg.

One side says shoot raw and then process offline in order to produce the best possible image - to your liking. Also, raw provides the greatest latitude for adjustments to correct exposure errors made when capturing the images. Ditto with being able to adjust for high dynamic range situations when no in-camera settings can produce a properly exposed image.

The other side says shoot jpg and just make sure you "get it right" when configuring your camera to capture the image. This seems to overlook those situations where light, physics, and mathematics make it impossible to capture a single properly exposed image.

Again, these contrasting comments leave me confused...

First, all camera sensors capture raw images and those raw images are processed into jpg, tif, etc - whatever format the individual photographer chooses (for in-camera shooters, whatever format the manufacturer chose to allow you to create).

In the traditional case of "raw shooters," the raw image processing is done offline using one of the various photo editing software products with a vast array of editing capabilities. Perhaps most importantly, editors offer the ability to adjust individual areas of an image without affecting the entire image and to repeatedly change those adjustments without altering the original image file.

In the case of "jpg shooters," that very same processing of the raw image occurs but it happens inside the camera based upon the particular image processing settings the photographer configured into the camera's menu options and how the manufacturer decided the controls would be applied. And, don't all in-camera options affect the entire image?

There's a third alternative that no one ever seems to talk about, the FREE raw photo editing software provided by the camera manufacturer: for Nikon, that's Capture NX-D; Canon has Canon Digital Photo Professional; and Sony has Imaging Edge, for example.

Each of these manufacturers editing software solutions allows one to capture/store raw images and then, later, apply any of the same internal settings that could have been used to produce a jpg image in-camera. These software editors use the same processing options, algorithms, and controls that were available in-camera. The benefit of shooting raw and then applying any of these equivalent in-camera options lets you select from any of those in-camera settings AFTER you have captured the image as a raw file. And, you can change your mind at any time and apply different "in-camera" controls. That means you can shoot raw and "get it right" even if you selected the wrong options and didn't "get it right" when capturing the image.

In sum: if you shoot raw and use the manufacturer's editing software, you can then later apply any of the same in-camera settings you choose - the same settings that were available in the camera to produce a jpg.

If you shoot jpg, well, you're pretty much done.