Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Yea, but changing in post is no consequence.
I'm not all about getting everything perfect in the camera.
I'd rather enjoy what I'm shooting.
And "absolutely correct" is relative.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

(Or a grasp of physics/technology.)

khorinek

It is the same thing. You need to process the RAW Image in Lightroom and or Photoshop or some other software. You just have more options when processing RAW images vs. JPG images.

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

Well said.😂👏

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

😎👍👏

mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

An emphatic no. Shooting in RAW allows you to draw out out detail and enhance the image you have created. rAW isn't an image like a jpeg, rather it is a bundle of data you camera has collected. PS and LR convert that data into a workable image.

chikid68 Loc: Tennesse USA

In fact the ACR plugin for Photoshop allows you to process Jpegs using Adobe camera raw just like a raw file.

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

This is exactly right. I've been editing photos 20+ years, long before raw was available to me. When raw became available, I tried it, and found very little difference. Further more, I think PS raw editor is what gives people the wrong idea about raw files. For example, I've heard repeatedly you can't edit white balance in a jpg. This is wrong, and I think its because PS raw editor has white balance tool that makes it a no brainer. Using curves and so on is much less "user friendly" so people think it can only be adjusted in raw files.

The other thing is people constantly say you can save a seriously screwed up exposure in raw. Perhaps, but then, don't seriously screw up your exposure. There is almost no excuse for that with today's cameras.

Personally, I enjoy editing more than taking pictures, and I rarely use raw.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

First you load up the RAW data and develop it (which is what the camera does to create a JPG).
Then you save the developed picture in your preferred file type. That is when you (should) start to Edit your picture. When the camera has developed the RAW data and created a JPG it discards what is considered to be unwanted spare data. BUT it still has the RAW data for those who want to do it differently.
ADOBE will continue to encourage photographers to develop their own RAWs whilst it increases sales of PS and LR.

editorsteve

My wife and I capture raw and jpeg. RAW has 12 or 14 bits per channel, jpeg just 8. Usually it doesnt matter. But when it does, it does. We use Lightroom and the rest of Adobe CS. For her event photog, daily highlights usually from jpeg.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

👍👍

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

I shoot jpegs and process every photo! Add a little mid shadow punch, denoise, sharpen , adjust color you know

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

I shoot RAW, and I post process every image.
That would mean that I don't think post processing takes the place, or is the same as, shooting in RAW.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

So what if his level of sophistication isn’t at the highest level? Maybe his pics are beautiful to him. And that’s all he will ever need. His friends and family think they are awesome just sayin. I to just shoot jpeg and I know I do light processing. Get a load of this my college educated son-in-law walks in my house and sees a bird photo and says oh my that belongs on National Geographic! Now I know it’s know where near that quality but just every day people think they are kool

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I agree that you can edit white balance in a jpg. However, you do have more adjustment capability if you start with a raw file. The adjustment is much simpler because you are starting with more information.

As far as correcting seriously screwed up exposures, raw does help a lot. And seriously screwed up exposures happen. It's no good just telling people not to do it. And the major cause is forgetting to restore a changed setting in your modern camera. Yes, it's operator error. But shooting raw helps to recover from our mistakes.

As far as I am concerned, even if I were not forgetful and always chose the right exposure I would still shoot raw only. When I got more than 10,000 images in my photopile I started to have trouble finding things. Since I started using Lightroom and adding keywords to the images I have a much easier time finding things I'm looking for, even if I forgot that I took a particular image. Shooting raw means I have to convert the files to something visible so my workflow is set up to just put the pictures into LR.

And since I got an iPhone last year I have done a lot of photos with it because it's so convenient. I find that since I have a jpg (or jpeg or HEIC) I frequently don't put it into LR because it's easier to just use it directly within the phone to send to people. So I have a lot of photos in the last year that are not in LR. These are now ephemera because my memory will not hold on to them well and also the iPhone photo organization isn't as good as LR at helping me to find images.