kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

I thought it might be an acronym because every time I see it in print, it is "RAW" and not "Raw". So, my second thought was correct, that it does refer to an "unprocessed" image.

As to the size of the image files, maybe I should check the menu settings, but it seem that a "Large JPEG" image may be 10-15 MB, whereas a RAW image could be twice that.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Making a change to an existing JPEG is a dicey move. Because of the JPEG compression in the file any adjustment is guaranteed to cause some damage that you wouldn't get if you processed a raw file. Usually the damage is pretty minor and most folks are happier to have the adjustment.

It can also be the software in the camera. Different cameras have more/less sophisticated and accessible JPEG processing software. Recent years have seen some pretty big advances in some makes/models versus others. Fuji has made a fair amount of noise with their built-in film simulations for their X camera line -- substantially more than you find from most DSLRs.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

CORRECTED: file dimensions are the same, data contained within the file is different, so a RAW file for my Z7 is 8256 x 5504 and a JPEG Fine file is 8256 x 5504, the RAW file contains 86,231,808 bytes (86.2MB) and the JPEG contains 15,783,104 bytes (15.8MB). Thus, there is more data to work with in the RAW file. Sorry for not being specific enough.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Back in the early ‘80s when I was studying photography I had one class that was applying the zone system to 35mm. The idea was that by the end of the course you could take notes on each roll you shot and process that roll by adjusting the processing to either give you the best overall results or give you the very best results for the shots most important to you.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

I shoot JPEG and also use the auto enhancement feature in the program when needed. Adds just enough “pop” to the image.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

David Sheff interviewed Ansel Adams in March 1983 for a piece to be published in Playboy Magazine, this would be a year prior to Adam's death in April 1984. Adams was 81 at the time of the interview. The interviewer asked, "Almost as quickly as photography has developed as an art form, the technology at your disposal has changed. How has it changed the art of photography?"

Ansel answered, "One of the negatives effects today is the tendency to fall back on the automatic features of the camera. When you rely on the camera's automatic devices, you're always going to get an image, but the camera can't compose for you and it can't change the values for you. It just works on the basis of averaging. On the the other hand, with newer cameras, meters and film, one is much more in control of the exposure. The technology is treater, but the tendency is for people to think less. All you have to do now is aim and push a button. That's fine if all you're interested in doing is recording things."

Further on in the interview the interviewer asked, "What else do you see coming in photography?

Ansel answered, "There's no end in sight. Electronic photography will soon be superior to anything we now have....Then the time will come when you will be able to make the entire photograph electronically. With the extremely high resolution and the enormous control you can get from electronics, the results will be fantastic. I wish I were young again!"

So, I'd say, Ansel would have most certainly only shot in RAW format.

cahale Loc: San Angelo, TX

I wonder what Mathew Brady used?

David in Dallas Loc: Dallas, Texas, USA

Glass plates, I think.

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

IIRC, shooting the kinds of landscapes je did, I'm pretty sure he was well dressed and covered.
;}

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Brady learned the daguerreotype technique from Samuel Morse (of telegraphy fame) who introduced it to the US.

He started his career with a portrait studio in 1844. During his career he photographed 18 of the 19 men who served as President from #6 John Quincy Adams to #25 William McKinley. Though 6 of them were not yet President when he died. Most of them were photographed as officers in the Civil War or predominant public figures before his death in the early 1870's.

The vast majority of "His" Civil War photos were actually taken by one his total of (at one time or another) 23 assistants he equipped and paid to roam the nation and record the war while he mostly stayed in Washington DC and supervised the effort. Most of them worked the Union side but some were allowed to work on the Confederate side during the war. He actually got clearance from President Lincoln to do what we now call "embed" his photographers as long as he paid for it and didn't expect anything from the government or military other than access. During their time working on the project each man had a wagon built as a portable darkroom since the "wet" process they used demanded developing to take place in a very short time after preparation and exposure.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Daguerreotype was the technique he learned in the early 1840's from Samuel Morse.
During the war his portable wagon darkrooms used the "wet-plate collodion" system which produced negatives on glass.

His camera from his Washington DC studio was actually used to take a portrait of President Eisenhower in 1957 when Time Magazine borrowed it from the collection of Civil War artifacts and photographs owned by the Meserve family.

paulrph1 Loc: Washington, Utah

Since raw is digital and when Adams shot there was no digital. Technically, the answer would be no, but knowing his methodology I would be inclined to say he would have used it, had it been available. Adams only shot in film since that was the only medium available to him but he had great vision of what he wanted so he did a lot of manipulation of the process.

w00dy4012 Loc: Thalia, East Virginia

But, there are are dumb questioners.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Dumb topics too ....

David Taylor

Dumb readers.