Let's See Some Images That Clearly Show RAW Is Better Than JPG
Mar 25, 2015 13:34:36 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
Jim Bob wrote:
Oh my goodness! I did not realize until your post that the concepts of debate and learning are mutually exclusive. So much for Socrates, Aristotle and Plato.
This is not a debate site, it a discussion site. If I wanted be in a debate it would be for something far more important than the advantages of shooting in raw. We're not here to make opposing arguments, but to share info with each other. You have unfortunately turned this into a debate, which is a contest which implies a winner and a loser, thus subverting the intent to provide helpful information from our accumulated knowledge. I will remember this for the future and when you pose questions under the guise of acquiring knowledge, I will just pass you by.
Mar 25, 2015 13:34:52 #
Screamin Scott wrote:
The majority have, some didn't. Bottom line is though, if you prefer to shoot JPEG's , make your adjustments in the menu beforehand & shoot away. If you want more control over the finished image, then shoot Raw & edit in post.There is no right or wrong way, just your way. The option is there for those who want to use it. If it made no difference, why would they give you the option ?....
Your logic is compelling. Jerry was the one who maintained the members gave me the same answer.
Mar 25, 2015 13:35:49 #
mwsilvers wrote:
This is not a debate site, it a discussion site.I ... (show quote)
No problem. I welcome the opportunity to not hear from you.
Mar 25, 2015 13:36:36 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
Jim Bob wrote:
No problem. I welcome the opportunity to not hear from you.
Your loss my friend because I clearly have more knowledge than you on the subject.
Mar 25, 2015 13:39:42 #
mwsilvers wrote:
Your loss my friend because I clearly have more knowledge than you on the subject.
A legend in his own mind. I bow before you, I'm not worthy oh great God of the photo.
:-D
Mar 25, 2015 13:39:46 #
ulfeld
Loc: New York City
Jim Bob ...you seem to have a lot of hostility .... raw allows more options in post processing and the option of making bigger prints ... that's it ...end of story ... no need to compare ....
Mar 25, 2015 13:41:58 #
Mar 25, 2015 13:42:11 #
ulfeld wrote:
Jim Bob ...you seem to have a lot of hostility .... raw allows more options in post processing and the option of making bigger prints ... that's it ...end of story ... no need to compare ....
Hostile? Me? Surely, you jest. I call them as I see them. Some folks misinterpret that as hostility.
Mar 25, 2015 13:43:39 #
Jim Bob wrote:
And I guess your post would be...
His post is a waste of time. Lots of folks here have lot of time to waste. He may not have missed reading a single reply.
I, for one, have enjoyed most every reply. Even his. Just not as much.
Mar 25, 2015 13:44:36 #
Marionsho wrote:
His post is a waste of time. Lots of folks here have lot of time to waste. He may not have missed reading a single reply.
I, for one, have enjoyed most every reply. Even his. Just not as much.
I, for one, have enjoyed most every reply. Even his. Just not as much.
My man.
:thumbup:
Mar 25, 2015 13:45:29 #
mwsilvers wrote:
This is not a debate site, it a discussion site. I... (show quote)
I wish it were true.
If this was a discussion site, then uniformed questions like that posed by the OP, would be quickly handled by expaning the obviouls difference between the two file types. However, the OP thought they could throw out a "do you still beat your wife?" type question and get away with it. Even after having the obvious explained, the OP kept on keeping on. Obviously the OP just wanted to start a fight or the question would have asked for a discussion of the difference instead of an impossible demonstration.
Mar 25, 2015 13:45:32 #
I'll Tell You What, My Eyes Aren't What They Were 86 Years Ago, But The Differance In The Nbr. 1 And 2 To Them Today Is So Minute That If You Hadn't Identified Ea. It Would Be Hard For Any One To Tell The Differance. Their Both Beautiful Captures. I See A Very Light Change In The Clouds And The Sun light Through The Bridge. I'll Shoot All JPEG'S And Delete The Bad Ones, That Makes My 40 Gb Harddrive Breathe A Little Better.
Mar 25, 2015 13:46:28 #
Bob Grove wrote:
I believe Jim Bob was looking for helpful information, not sarcasm.
You obviously haven't read the whole thread....
Mar 25, 2015 13:48:09 #
dsmeltz wrote:
I wish it were true. br br If this was a discu... (show quote)
In other words, ask the question your way and it deserves a response, ask it my way and it deserves trashing. If I didn't know better this would sound elitist.
Mar 25, 2015 13:48:17 #
RRS
Loc: Not sure
SharpShooter wrote:
One of the things I find peculiar about this whole... (show quote)
Good Morning SS! I can't believe you are still adding fuel to this nonessential post from someone with a closed mind. He seems to want something proven to him, who cares. You are a working professional and know that there are times for both RAW and JPEG. Adobe, DXO and many other software companies should all be ashamed of themselves for fooling the public into thinking that you could get better results using their products. You just have to be able and want to learn about them and some just don't want too or it's above them. This has been a total waste of time because I don't see anyone changing their ways due to any of this. Now get out there and make some money and pay your taxes because I'm on SS and need the money. :lol: :lol: :lol:
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.