Google| Subject | Re: post processing |
| From | YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle |
| Date | 03/17/2014 09:56 (03/17/2014 09:56) |
| Message-ID | <lg6dc8$rdd$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | David Taylor |
Le 17/03/14 07:55, David Taylor a écrit :
David TaylorIt CAN be the saviour of inapropriate exposure, but that is usually not the main reason or the reason at all. I have not the same impression from here than you get. And has I stated, it is quite rare nowadays to get bad exposure from recent cameras, even in full auto mode, even from cheap ones.
On 16/03/2014 19:50, Eric Stevens wrote: []Eric StevensDavid Taylor
A more accurate interpretation might be that they use RAW images because of the scene's wide dynamic range.
I will use JPG for snapshots but not for images where I might want to print them to a reasonable size. In that case I prefer my own image massaging to whatever might be done by the camera.
It's both - you can plan on using RAW if you know that the scene /needs/ it, but the impression I get from reports here is that often it is the saviour of inappropriate exposure.
I am not discussing your choices, they are yours and perfect for you. Raw shooting is about getting more choices in post-processing.
The process is no more or no less with raw or jpg : the defaut process can be used in camera or outside of it, just the same way. If you plan to go beyond defaut process, the raw will be still there.
Noëlle Adam
03/13/2014-
-
-
