No you always convert your file to a DNG or PSD. They you can go back and change your edit if you wish. Converting the image to JPEG stops the process, and you must start all over again from the original image. And save the RAW image with it.

No. I always convert my images to PSD files so that I can manipulate them and not lose the original base image. You can save them in a variety of formats from Photoshop.

Flexography was usually 60 line screen to 120 line screen although substantial progress has been made with ultra thin photopolymer plates to enable 150 line screen printing. Litho has always been 150 line screen. Pixel data requirement for a 120 line screen or dots per lineal inch has always been a little less than 240 for Flexography and 300 for Lithography. A printing dot on a photopolymer plate cannot be made the size of a pixel. A 1% dot (2pixels) usually cannot hold enough ink to transfer to a substrate like paper or film and the drop out point is usually 3%.

With 35 years experience with printing most presses print with 120 to 150 line screen...the reason Photoshop has 240dpi and 300 dpi settings (dpi=2x line screen). Most presses have a difficult time holding a 3% dot. So a blowout prints as an ugly white hole or void. People today are spoiled with ink jets and lasers that print with perfect register and 1440 dpi and higher. The real world prints in volume with separated printing plates. That is the reason for rejection of images submitted to Stock Photo and others. You have to know what you are doing and how your images will be printed if you wish to sell photos.

Exactly. If there are no color pixels in the overexposed highlights, there is no software to manufacture them. However with an underexposed image, the color data is there to manipulate, reduce etc. for an image with good detail. Printing presses print a blow out as a white hole-a total disaster and unacceptable.

I shoot a lot of real estate images per day. Using available mixed lighting and bracketed time exposures with a constant f11 aperture, the white balance changes for every room. Especially in low light situations, digital cameras tend to shift the hues to a salmon, orange to yellow cast. I carry a little 8 inch target on a stand and shoot a good exposure for every room prior to shooting the bracket. When viewing raw images in Lightroom CC, placing the picker on the 18% gray color will reveal the exact temperature to sync with the bracket. Spot On color is achieved in every instance. Same for models, weddings etc. Nikon produces flat images with a slight blue cast. Canon is so much better with color out if the camera. I prefer a warmer image out of the camera and for that reason I switched to Canon cameras years ago. At any rate decorators of expensive high end homes are anal about achieving accurate color. I don’t take any changes so Lightroom is paramount. Setting white balance in the camera is time consuming and a pain in the butt. Shooting a little target or Passport Color Checker is the fastest way to accurate color using Lightroom. Shooting JPEGS is difficult to correct with tint filters, and when you have 25 or more images, consistency is key throughout.

Shooting RAW, always underexpose the image by one f stop. From experience you will never be sorry when capturing detail is important. Overexposed is trash. You should never have a noise issue with an ISO of 400 and below. If you do, trash your camera and start over with a decent model. Good pros will bracket 3 rapid flash images. This is done to eliminate a blink rather than exposure, but it works for both.

Amen brother. And I did :)

One of my wife's fellow teachers got married last year. She was very unhappy with her photos. Wanting the background out of focus and knowing of my editing advertising ability, she asked my wife if I would not mind working with the photos. Getting them last night I was appalled to find that every one of them was out of focus, raccoon eyes because the photographer did not use off camera flash, and just overall flat. If I paid ANY money for this crap I would have sued the photographer for a refund.

She already is unhappy with the photography. I just haven't the heart to tell her the photos are out of focus and not much can be done with them. I am pushing the limits with sharpening at 175 as it is. Certainly they cannot be made into 16 x 20 prints. She wanted to give this picture to her mother for Christmas. From 15 feet my Canon 5DSr and the 85mm f-1.2 lens captures the veins in the whites of the eye requiring editing. It is just a shame there are people out there that are taking money when they don't know what they are doing. At least if you are back lighting your image with the sun, have the sense to use an off camera flash to capture the eyes and facial features.

Highly disagree. If you follow the rule of underexposing your RAW images, you can do wonders with software. An out of focus or blown out image is just trash--sorry you are SOL.

You will not see any difference because the RAW image is viewed as a jpeg. The difference will be the amount of data contained in the file to manipulate. Also when you bring a RAW image into Lightroom, one is able to see the color temperature value, use a white pick to find the optimum color temperature and adjust multiple images to a numerical value like 3200K or what your white balance target reveals. With a jpeg it is very difficult to adjust hue with the tint sliders.

I highly recommend you watch Brady’s tutorial. That is why your speed light fires like a machine gun. Beautiful pictures are achieved especially when you have an easy stand or an assistant to hold the light off camera with a pole. No need for expensive filters and multiple lights. Let a light and the sun do the work and at 1/4000 shutter speed hand held with any heavy lens is possible.

Yes you can. Check out Scott Brady's tutorial on high speed sync photography. I think it is in the Sekonic series. Fascinating how he can use a 50 watt speed light and 1/4000 shutter speeds to achieve wonderful facial color and blue sky back lit backgrounds. With a 600 watt Profoto or Bowens light it is even easier.

Sorry I would still use my methods for photography I am interested in capturing. Just have no need for longer exposures in peak of day.

I would just use faster shutter speeds and f32 with my Canon 90mm T/S lens. Shooting RAW, I have been able to get detail anywhere...ditto with HDR bracketed images. As I said, I have no use for silky unrealistic water. Save the money.

Looking at this product, I cannot see the value of using this product. Shooting RAW, I can achieve any combination I want in post. I would rather spend the money on a good quality polarizing filter for my landscapes.