Yes, but the camera processes the jpg image automaticaly and sometimes automatic settings do not give the best results. With RAW images the photographer has total control, now this may not be necessary with every shot but when you need it it's good to have it.

The convention for HDR is to take three bracketed exposures and then use something like Photomatix to produce the result, but no one explains how to take three separate photos and have no movement between them. The conventional procedure therefore restricts HDR to static subjects even with a rapid firing camera. The solution is to take the photos intended for HDR in camera RAW mode. The image produced in RAW is large but one of its considerable advantages is that the exposure can be adjusted on the computer after the shot is taken. If you shoot to overexpose by as much as 1.5 stops the burnt out highlights can be retrieved in the RAW processor and the three required images for HDR can easily be produced. You can even dispense with Photomatix and process the image entirely in photoshop. To learn more about this go to www.guygowan.com

The convention for HDR is to take three bracketed exposures and then use something like Photomatix to produce the result, but no one explains how to take three separate photos and have no movement between them. The conventional procedure therefore restricts HDR to static subjects even with a rapid firing camera. The solution is to take the photos intended for HDR in camera RAW mode. The image produced in RAW is large but one of its considerable advantages is that the exposure can be adjusted on the computer after the shot is taken. If you shoot to overexpose by as much as 1.5 stops the burnt out highlights can be retrieved in the RAW processor and the three required images for HDR can easily be produced. You can even dispense with Photomatix and process the image entirely in photoshop. To learn more about this go to www.guygowan.com

The convention for HDR is to take three bracketed exposures and then use something like Photomatix to produce the result, but no one explains how to take three separate photos and have no movement between them. The conventional procedure therefore restricts HDR to static subjects even with a rapid firing camera. The solution is to take the photos intended for HDR in camera RAW mode. The image produced in RAW is large but one of its considerable advantages is that the exposure can be adjusted on the computer after the shot is taken. If you shoot to overexpose by as much as 1.5 stops the burnt out highlights can be retrieved in the RAW processor and the three required images for HDR can easily be produced. You can even dispense with Photomatix and process the image entirely in photoshop. To learn more about this go to www.guygowan.com

The convention for HDR is to take three bracketed exposures and then use something like Photomatix to produce the result, but no one explains how to take three separate photos and have no movement between them. The conventional procedure therefore restricts HDR to static subjects even with a rapid firing camera. The solution is to take the photos intended for HDR in camera RAW mode. The image produced in RAW is large but one of its considerable advantages is that the exposure can be adjusted on the computer after the shot is taken. If you shoot to overexpose by as much as 1.5 stops the burnt out highlights can be retrieved in the RAW processor and the three required images for HDR can easily be produced. You can even dispense with Photomatix and process the image entirely in photoshop. To learn more about this go to www.guygowan.com

There is a peculiar school of thought that considers everything should be done in the camera, not a thing many great photographers such as Ansel Adams would have done, and now in digital photography it should be recognised that most digital images lack sufficient contrast and sharpness to be used straight from the camera and post processing is necessary and normal. In Photoshop this can be accomplished relatively easily and Action work flows can be setup so that all the necessary processing can be done with just one click.

This is true except when you have a RAW image where burnt out highlights can be recovered by adjusting the exposure in a RAW file converter. As much as 1.5-2.0 stops of over exposure in the camera can be recovered in a RAW file and this I believe is main practical advantage of RAW images.

The picture is taken in the camera but there is no camera that can capture the full dynamic range the eye can see. This is particularly true in landscape work but the careful use of Photoshop will enable the photographer to get much closer to what was seen and overcome some of the shortcomings inherent in all cameras.

To find out more you need to search Guy Gowan and find the YouTube where you will see several examples of the process workflow and in particular look for Process Workflow Seminar where all will be explained. I have followed this method of working for several years and it is by far the best way of working, particularly with landscapes. The method is updated from time to time, always to give improved action and results. I have never found the method or anything close to it in any book or publication from any other source.
I do not nor ever have been paid for promoting this method of working. Incidentally he does tour Australia from time to time giving demonstrations.

Yes there is a fee if you want to take full advantage of the system but considering how good it is I find it well worth the money compared with buying ND filters and spending considerable time in adjusting images by other means that I don't believe produce such good results.

Yes, but the amount of control available in the camera is extremely limited, as Ansel Adams advocated the negative (and now the RAW image) should be regarded as the equivalent of a musical score and the print (made with significant adjustment) is the performance.

Instead of ND filters and with far more control consider an HDR technique or more accurately called True Dynamic Range that is advocated and demonstrated at www.guygowan.com where it is shown just what can be achieved in Photoshop with masking and calculations. Start with a RAW image, adjust the exposure in a RAW converter, then load the file into Photoshop where the appropriate masking and calculations can be made. If you setup the described Action script, control is quick, adjustable and repeatable for all future images and this technique is particularly good for landscape photographs.

You must process RAW files. I open them in a RAW converter (I my case Apple Aperture, but any converter will do), then adjust the exposure before exporting to Photoshop where I use an Action script devised by Guy Gowan, at www.guygowan.com, that processes the image principally for contrast and sharpness and then I have an image I can save in jpg or leave in psd. It does not take very long to do this once the initial Action script has been setup and the results are generally very acceptable.

The big, big advantage of RAW images is that you can adjust the exposure after the photo has been taken. This means that in landscape work in particular the camera can be set to over expose by as much as 1.5-2.0 stops. When the fils is opened in a RAW converter the exposure can be adjusted to recover the highlights and this procedure ensures the shadows are open and free from noise.
A single RAW file can also be used to produce an HDR image from a single shot thus avoiding the problem of movement between shots in the more normal HDR procedure. All of this is explained in great detail by Guy Gowan on his website www.guygowan.com