Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Links and Resources
The pros and cons of shooting RAW versus JPEG
Page <<first <prev 12 of 14 next> last>>
Jul 18, 2021 09:25:52   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
selmslie wrote:
I think that Ysarex is being disingenuous.

It's likely that he actually followed some of the links I provided and it finally dawned on him that I know what I am talking about.

According to you I should have exposed more than a stop less than I did. https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-704155-9.html#12401296 What's the reason for that? What benefit would I have gotten from exposing more than a stop less than I did? You know what you're talking about, then answer that.

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 09:31:38   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
Delderby wrote:
Yes - I see what you mean. That leaf needs some work. The flower is, in fact, pink and white. The following is the pic with leaf toned down. The choice would be cloning or simply removing

Or capturing a raw file and making sure the highlight wasn't clipped.
(Sans controlling everything in a studio), my point remains some PP will usually improve the photo. If that's the case then you're ahead to accept that and anticipate it by setting yourself up to do that as effectively as possible.

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 09:35:40   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
Ysarex wrote:
I asked for a reference for specific BS you were shoveling and that you did not provide. Still waiting.....

It’s in the link on light value. But if you won’t read it I’m not going to read it to you.

Reply
 
 
Jul 18, 2021 09:41:55   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
BigDaddy wrote:
Good job Delderby.

Not sure what your argument was that this destroys, but I need more evidence, like a couple graphs, maybe a pie chart, some convoluted quotes from unknown sources. Perhaps a web link or 30 from people that cut and paste the same wrong/misleading information over and over.

Any how, I don't have a 16 bit monitor available, nor an optical spectrometer but I like the result you achieved on that blown out leaf. Whatever you did, you would have had to do the same exact thing whether originally captured in raw or jpg,
Good job Delderby. br br Not sure what your arg... (show quote)

A raw file provides far more data than does a JPEG. As a general rule when a JPEG does not have sufficient data to successfully effect a PP change it's very likely a raw file will. As a general rule it is not possible to PP a JPEG and achieve the same results as is possible PP a raw file.

If as Delderby's photo indicates, best results typically require some PP then odds of achieving the best result favor working with raw data.

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 09:51:53   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
selmslie wrote:
It’s in the link on light value. But if you won’t read it I’m not going to read it to you.

That's not a reference. Citing yourself is not providing a reference. And you called me disingenuous!

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 09:56:07   #
BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
 
Ysarex wrote:
Or capturing a raw file and making sure the highlight wasn't clipped.
(Sans controlling everything in a studio), my point remains some PP will usually improve the photo. If that's the case then you're ahead to accept that and anticipate it by setting yourself up to do that as effectively as possible.

Or capturing as a jpg and making sure the highlight wasn't clipped.
He doesn't likely need worry about "as effectively as possible" unless he plans on sending the photo out for a complete, forensic analysis. Perhaps to a caped photographer with x-ray eyes and a 16 bit monitor...

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 10:16:44   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
BigDaddy wrote:
Or capturing as a jpg and making sure the highlight wasn't clipped.

Which would require reducing exposure.
Which would make everything in the photo darker.
Which would require PP to adjust the image brightness.
And that PP as a general rule will be less effective using the JPEG rather than a raw file.

Would you like an opportunity to demonstrate that?

Reply
 
 
Jul 18, 2021 10:32:34   #
srt101fan
 
Generally speaking, I find these RAW vs JPEG, PP vs SOOC arguments to be rather silly.

You RAW/PP shooters need to accept that, (a) there's some damn fine JPEG/SOOC photography going on, and (b) some photographers just don't want to PP.

You JPEG/SOOCers need to accept that RAW shooters have more options and bigger tool boxes than you do.

🙄

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 11:49:57   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
Ysarex wrote:
That's not a reference. Citing yourself is not providing a reference. And you called me disingenuous!

It’s an explanation that anyone with an open mind can understand.

But since your mind is closed you’ll never know. That’s your loss.

You probably would not have understood it anyhow.

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 11:54:22   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
Ysarex wrote:
Which would require reducing exposure.
Which would make everything in the photo darker. ...

Sometimes the opposite is true. Just look at all of the discussions here about ETTR. Have you never heard if it?

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 11:56:16   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
selmslie wrote:
It’s an explanation that anyone with an open mind can understand.

But since your mind is closed you’ll never know. That’s your loss.

You probably would not have understood it anyhow.

I rejected your BS as bogus and asked you to cite a supporting reference. You have not done so.....
I supplied a supporting reference.

And you still haven't answered this question: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-704155-12.html#12404552

Reply
 
 
Jul 18, 2021 12:02:29   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
selmslie wrote:
Sometimes the opposite is true. Just look at all of the discussions here about ETTR. Have you never heard if it?

I responded to BigDaddy's comment: "Or capturing as a jpg and making sure the highlight wasn't clipped." which was directly concerning Delderby's rose photo.

Your comment is out of context. In context you are wrong.

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 12:17:39   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
Ysarex wrote:
I rejected your BS as bogus and asked you to cite a supporting reference. You have not done so.....
I supplied a supporting reference.

And you still haven't answered this question: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-704155-12.html#12404552

You don’t understand the subject and you just want to argue. I’m not wasting any more time on you.

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 12:19:28   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
selmslie wrote:
You don’t understand the subject and you just want to argue. I’m not wasting any more time on you.

Still waiting for that reference.....
I supplied a supporting reference.
And you still haven't answered this question: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-704155-12.html#12404552

Reply
Jul 18, 2021 14:05:49   #
johngault007 Loc: Florida Panhandle
 
It's like seeing a turtle slowly walk on to a road. You know it's going to get smashed, and you feel very bad about it, and probably could stop it from happening. But still, you just keep watching, knowing that turtle is going to get smashed.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 12 of 14 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Links and Resources
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2023 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.