Why RAW? (Page 18): Isn't that what I just said - pretty directly and by implication? as well as addressing the entire issue directly and in detail --- AND -- also a little tongue in...

rlv567 Loc: Baguio City, Philippines

jlg1000 wrote:

Who cares !?

We are having fun !

Isn't that what I just said - pretty directly and by implication? as well as addressing the entire issue directly and in detail --- AND -- also a little tongue in cheek. Read it again, with comprehension!!!

Loren - in Beautiful Baguio City

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

rlv567 wrote:

I was not aware that Andy Devine had a part in the development of UNIX.

Loren - Beautiful Baguio City

You mean the co-star of Wild Bill Hickock, the TV show?

Old Coot

CHG_CANON wrote:

You said it, not me...

How do you shoot RAW. ? Thought it was a process after you take the photo

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Old Coot wrote:

How do you shoot RAW. ? Thought it was a process after you take the photo

Actually, it's a technical capture process too. Certainly, there's the proper camera setting(s) to set the file format and target card to write the files. But also, there's a goal to expose to the right, many times to such an extent the JPEG version of the same file is virtually useless.

jlg1000 Loc: Uruguay / South America

Old Coot wrote:

How do you shoot RAW. ? Thought it was a process after you take the photo

Well... we always could make things more complicated.

The camera shoots in 'raw' and then writes that data on the card as 'RAW'

JD750 Loc: SoCal

jlg1000 wrote:

Well... we always could make things more complicated.

The camera shoots in 'raw' and then writes that data on the card as 'RAW'

cony25

Architect1776 wrote:

Why is raw capitalized on UHH?
Does RAW stand for 3 words?
Thx

Yea, what is it about raw, which takes an enormous amount of space?
Can we see the difference of what can you rescue in a raw pic vs. jpeg? Is it worth it?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

cony25 wrote:

Yea, what is it about raw, which takes an enormous amount of space?
Can we see the difference of what can you rescue in a raw pic vs. jpeg? Is it worth it?

It's not the visible aspect so much as it is the difference in editing ability between the two.

jlg1000 Loc: Uruguay / South America

cony25 wrote:

Yea, what is it about raw, which takes an enormous amount of space?
Can we see the difference of what can you rescue in a raw pic vs. jpeg? Is it worth it?

This has been discussed 16.389 times - and counting - in UHH.

RAW is the recipe for the cake.

Jpeg (as long keeps outrunning the axe of obsolescence... sheer luck) is the cake itself.

If you have the recipe you can make make variations of the cake as you wish... 'ya know, add more sugar, maybe some lemon zest...

If you just have the cake, the only you can do is eat it.

It's up to you to decide if you want to be a cook or a diner

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

JPG is not "sheer luck" It's taking a picture that is good enough to sue wit out "repairs"

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

jlg1000 wrote:

This has been discussed 16.389 times - and counting - in UHH.

RAW is the recipe for the cake.

Jpeg (as long keeps outrunning the axe of obsolescence... sheer luck) is the cake itself.

If you have the recipe you can make make variations of the cake as you wish... 'ya know, add more sugar, maybe some lemon zest...

If you just have the cake, the only you can do is eat it.

It's up to you to decide if you want to be a cook or a diner

16.389 times?
So just a little over 16 times?
Really?
The spelling of raw or RAW?
Interesting.

David Martin Loc: Cary, NC

Picture Taker wrote:

JPG is not "sheer luck" It's taking a picture that is good enough to sue wit out "repairs"

Rather litigious, no?

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

jpeg is not "sheer luck" as it doesn't need to be repaired as we do with a RAW picture. If we shoot RAW and jpeg we can use the jpeg easily if we shot the properly and fix the rest in RAW. PS jpeg allows simple fix up.

David Martin Loc: Cary, NC

Picture Taker wrote:

jpeg is not "sheer luck" as it doesn't need to be repaired as we do with a RAW picture. If we shoot RAW and jpeg we can use the jpeg easily if we shot the properly and fix the rest in RAW. PS jpeg allows simple fix up.

A RAW file doesn't need to be "repaired" any more than did a film negative before printing it.
Rather, the RAW file needs to be fully developed.
And when it comes to "developing" or otherwise processing or enhancing the file, a RAW offers more data and possibility than does a JPEG.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

OK but I shot slides, they were not "repaired". They were either used (good) as taken or no good. They were developed as its now doe in camera in JPG and is acceptable or not.
I am not knocking the use of RAW but it has become with some of us, a way to fix the picture that was not taken properly (and we all take some that way) but it can become a way of life which does not improve our ability to TAKE good pictures. The shooting in bursts because it doesn't cost any thing add to that attitude.
Life with photography is not just one way.