Raw can often do that but I choose raw to get better image quality than possible from any camera JPEG software.

Processing a raw file I always create a better quality final image than it's possible to generate as an SOOC JPEG from the same camera same scene regardless of the camera settings. I use processing software that's better than the software in the camera and I can tailor the processing to the specific image. The processing software in the camera is constrained by multiple limitations and the inability to address the image in any way locally.

Quite simply processing a raw file I can't produce a final result image with IQ as bad as the JPEG from the camera.

There are numerous reasons why but here's a simple example to make the point. We all encounter occasions where we have to or want to take a photo in low light -- a high ISO photo. So sitting here at my computer I took a photo of my mouse at ISO 6400. Now as a rule most folks will want that photo to retain as much detail as possible while at the same time suppressing the inevitable noise.

Camera software steps up: My Canon camera has two levels of high ISO noise reduction that "Reduce image noise. Especially effective at high ISO speeds." I shot them both so we can compare -- I call them level "sucks big" and level "super sucks." Now my joking aside noise reduction is processor intensive work. We know how to do a good job of it but bottom line is we just can't afford the processing overhead to put it in our cameras. We really can't expect the processor in the camera to compete with the resources of a computer.

In addition to my camera's two SOOC JPEGs I also processed a raw file. Let's have a look first at 100% samples. From the left we see the camera's level 1 NR processing (sucks big). It does a poor job reducing noise and turns the detail in the photo to mush. In the middle is the level 2 NR from the camera which super sucks. Noise processing is pretty good but fine detail is completely missing -- calling it super sucks is being generous. Now that's it if you're shooting SOOC JPEG. You get to choose between sucks big and super sucks. Get it sucking right from the camera -- isn't that the JPEG shooter's mantra?

The right side image has the best noise reduction while at the same time retaining the best detail. I processed the raw file in DXO which does a stellar job dealing with noise. If you want the best possible image quality you won't get it from the camera -- the camera software is designed to a different target -- it has to cut corners and it does.

I have a radical idea!

It's like the story of the new parents that were awakened in the middle of the night by their screaming baby. The poor kid was crying his eye out at the top of his lungs so the panicking and distraught parents read into their book on child care to see what can be done to comfort the baby- Waht could be the matter- was it cholic, hunger, a dirty diaper, a serious illness??? The crying was so intense that it awoke Grandma who lived in the apartment below. She came into the room and said "PUT DOWN THE BOOK AND PICK UP THE BABY"! The baby stopped screaming and went back to sleep!

So...put down the book, shut down the computer (for a little while) and PICK UP YOUR CAMERA. Shoot a variety of images in both Jpeg and RAW. Shoot some image in difficult lighting scenarios, harsh contrasts, bracket the exposures- shootout the right and left of the meter reading, perhaps make some intentional over and underexposures, shoot what you normally shoot- people, street scenes, birds, bugs, landscapes, birthday parties-whatever, and then apply you editing software and see the extent of correction in each mode. See how you can enhance even the well-crafted files. GET THE FEEL OF IT! See to what extent you can or can't extend the dynamic range in each mode. Then decide for yourself which modes are appropriate for which kinds of shooting that you do.

Years ago, in film photography, this would be an expensive and tedious chore. You would have to wait for film processing or do it yourself in the darkroom. Nowadays you can observe instant results and then plug into your software and see instant improvements or not.

Of course, there is a plethora of reading material but hands-on experience and organized experimentation is the best way to master many photographic techniques.

Here on the forum, there are lots of helpful and knowledgeable folks. There are also folks that just love to argue! Some have some sound knowledge and technical skill but insist that their way is the only method and unfortunately believe that other alternatives are "stupid" or unworthy of discussion. That will give you a headache and cause more confusion rather than helping you.

The simple fact is that Jpegs can yield decent images and can be corrected or enhanced to a certain degree. RAW files have some additional potential for both correction and enhancement but usually require more skill in post-processing advanced procedures. If you are a casual family snapshooter Jpegs will do the job. If you are interested in more serious work and maximizing the quality of your images, especially where large prints are planned, it is worth your while to learn all the ins and outs of RAW capture and all its post-processing potential.

Folks insisting that shooting in RAW is strictly for inapt or sloppy photographers is- well- suffice it to say that I fervently disagree with that concept.

SHOOT- EXPERIMENT- HYPOTHASIZE- FORM METHODS- COME TO CONCLUSIONS. Mastering photography is like a vacation trip- half the fun is getting there!

Good luck! ED (AKA Grnadpa)