Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Now RAW vs JPEG (digest 490)
From: MEB at GoodPhotos.com (Michael Eric Berube)
Date: Sat May 21 08:12:15 2005
References: <200505211407.j4LE4JQ1035003@server1.waverley.reid.org>

That venerable master of our art Ted wrote:

>>>Why shoot RAW? It's nothing but a pain in the ass and more work!
>>>
>>>My routine when handling digital images on the computer? JPEG
>>    
>>
Just caught this thread in the digest.

I like to explain it this way...Shooting JPEGs is like shooting with a 
Polaroid back. You CAN take a polaroid print today and scan it and make 
all sorts of changes to it in Photoshop, but if you shoot in RAW you 
have the negatives to work with. Negatives that can be used to make much 
better images in the end without throwing away any vital detail.
 
Better still than film negatives, your digital (RAW) 'negatives' can be 
'processed' again and again in the 'developer' of your choice for any 
given number of options. Imagine shooting TriX and having the choice of 
using Xtol one day and Diafine the next and D76 later still ALL on the 
same roll of film....10 years from now being able to use whatever new 
'developer' (raw converter) that comes out that allows you to pull even 
MORE detail out of the 'negatives' that the RAW files offer you.

Raw shooting is as much a pain in the ass as choosing to use film over 
polaroids. Film has to be processed to be printed. Polaroids give you 
instant prints that are often 'good enough.'

-- 
Be well,
Michael Eric B?rub?
GoodPhotos.com
AnotherMaine.com