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

A raw file requires parameters to generate an image. The jpg uses your camera settings to apply those parameters when it takes the raw data and produces a jpg from them. The camera settings are included in the EXIF data, but some of them are proprietary and third party software can't read them. They estimate by reverse engineering, but results are not exact.

Basically the raw data does not look like anything useful until those parameters are specified. Many postprocessing programs can have presets that try to estimate the value of all the parameters, but the thing about raw files is that you can do such a wide variety of things with them, standardized software can't really show you what you want it to look like. You have to tell is how to adjust the data into an image.

So generally the raw data may look kind of flat when you open it in the postprocessing software. You have to learn how to adjust the parameters to get the look you want. Without your imput, there's no real reason to shoot raw. The advantage of raw is that if you make a mistake in the camera settings, you can correct that mistake in post. But you have to learn how to do that.

You can't just take a jpg and a raw file and compare them.

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

(Download)

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

Thanks for the reply. Everyones input has been enlightening and I now understand what I am seeing.

John Sh Loc: Toronto, Australia

Have a look at Honeyview. It opens all manner of files and does open the raw as it is.
You can get it here. https://download.cnet.com/Honeyview/3000-18488_4-75369181.html