In this post in this thread: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-698929-4.html#12283857 I was providing the OP with an explanation to answer the question: "How does a raw converter work?" I also noted about the 4th image in that set (see below), "This is the image you would see without doing any post processing except to set the white balance." That is a default open in the raw converter. It's processed.

When you open a raw file in any raw processing app and you have done absolutely nothing yet but open the image the software app shows you a very processed image on your display.

To display a raw file on your computer LR will first:
Demosaic the raw data.
Set black and white points for the raw data.
Apply a camera input profile to the data.
Set a white balance value for the image.
Apply a tone curve for the image.
Apply lens profile corrections to the image.
Apply input sharpening to the image.
Apply default noise correction to the image.

All of that is processing and it all gets done before you see anything. Otherwise you get shown the embedded JPEG.

In this post in this thread: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-698929-4.html#12283857 I was providing the OP with an explanation to answer the question: "How does a raw converter work?" I also noted about the 4th image in that set (see below), "This is the image you would see without doing any post processing except to set the white balance." That is a default open in the raw converter. It's processed.

When you open a raw file in any raw processing app and you have done absolutely nothing yet but open the image the software app shows you a very processed image on your display.

To display a raw file on your computer LR will first:
Demosaic the raw data.
Set black and white points for the raw data.
Apply a camera input profile to the data.
Set a white balance value for the image.
Apply a tone curve for the image.
Apply lens profile corrections to the image.
Apply input sharpening to the image.
Apply default noise correction to the image.

All of that is processing and it all gets done before you see anything. Otherwise you get shown the embedded JPEG.

I've been thinking about this since making my original post on the subject. Every word is true.

The rub, though, is the exact same words are true for JPEG images. Every JPEG file has to be processed before it can be displayed or printed. It has to be decompressed, blocks of pixels reconstructed, printer data protocols construcued, and graphics signals created. The only difference is that JPEG is mostly the same for everybody and the processors are now available just about everywhere (I remember when that wasn't so).. The xame is true if we are talking about TIFF or GIF or any other format you can think of So the argument, while enthusiastic and energetic and emotional, is in reality quite empty. Raw is, in fact, just another file format available to store the information necessary to recreate a two-dimensional image. That's all. Like with many other very useful things, there's absolutely no magic in it.

I've been thinking about this since making my original post on the subject. Every word is true.

The rub, though, is the exact same words are true for JPEG images. Every JPEG file has to be processed before it can be displayed or printed. It has to be decompressed, blocks of pixels reconstructed, printer data protocols construcued, and graphics signals created. The only difference is that JPEG is mostly the same for everybody and the processors are now available just about everywhere (I remember when that wasn't so).. The xame is true if we are talking about TIFF or GIF or any other format you can think of So the argument, while enthusiastic and energetic and emotional, is in reality quite empty. Raw is, in fact, just another file format available to store the information necessary to recreate a two-dimensional image. That's all. Like with many other very useful things, there's absolutely no magic in it.

Assuming you capture the maximum size JPEGs for your camera, you have the exact same number of pixels in your JPEG as your RAW file. Your camera is an image editing computer. You get noise processing, White Balance and sharpening done automatically to your JPEG. You can even adjust / fine tune these values in your camera set-up. Many people will get 'sharper' images by very simply increasing their contrast and sharpening settings by a simple and modest increase of +1 over the default settings in their camera.

What you lose in JPEG is the bit-depth of color data and the wider colorspace options of RAW. Your JPEG files, by definition of the format, are 8-bit files. This 2^8 (2 to the power of 8) or 256 shades of Red, Blue and Green. When you increase to 12-bits, that yields 4096 shades of red, blue and green. As you adjust your colors, this bit-depth comes into play allowing for smooth transitions of color shades, especially in the blues of the sky. See the color banding in the sky of the JPEG example below. This is a real-life example of where 8-bits can impact your ability to lighten / darken / adjust the WB of the 'colors' of your JPEG, edits that need those various shades of colors available from the larger bit depth of the colors shades that define the smooth transition from red into violet into blue into green into yellow into orange.

The color 'banding' (right side) is the absence of these color shades needed to accomplish the smooth transition:



You can accomplishment plenty of edits in JPEG. You just have to be more careful in your exposure and recognize that if you 'miss' in the image exposure, you may not be able to recover the JPEG image that would be trivial work in RAW. Work like computer-based HDR also doesn't work as well on the JPEG, where in RAW, you can take one file, push the exposure up and down to create a 3-image set and then let the HDR software run its magic.

The example above was linked from the discussion at: https://photographypro.com/raw-vs-jpeg/