Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Don Hoey
My conclusion therefore is that to use RAW and not be driven mad by it you do need a powerful PC. With more limited PC resources then using JPG fine with the occasional use of RAW is a more satisfying way to go. A well exposed and not overly in camera processed JPG is still makes a good negative.
So a couple of thoughts for the melting pot.
1) For those with less PC resource the origonal question of in camera processing is still valid.
In these discussions I think it important not to lose sight of the costs of some of this kit, and peoples ability to afford it. Fast PC with large HD £400+ Adobe CS2 £500+. I ask myself the question would any of my images directly benefit from this spend, or have I been in anyway been limited without it, and the answer is a resounding NO. Nice to have but far from essential.
2) A correctly exposed JPG is NOT inferior to RAW. With the very sophisitcated light metering systems now built into cameras how often do you really need, or rely on the exposure compensation of + / - 2 EV offered by RAW.
Don
|
I reckon you summed things up nicely with those conclusions.
I've quietly been watching this thread with some interest as I only started using raw myself maybe 6-7 months ago ..... with some prodding, encouragement and help from Stephen Anstey (in other photography boards.
I was also using an old Win98 SE PC until about 18 months ago and that struggled with PS7 using jpegs, let alone raw! I'm not a very experienced photographer either, only got started in 2003 with a Canon G3 than got the Pentax istD November 2003 so I felt I needed to concentrate more on learning to use the camera more competently before trying to expand my digital darkroom skills.
When I eventually upgraded the PC I was still reluctant to attempt using raw - but I eventually decided I should at least give it a go and learn how to go about things - then I'd have more choices if I at least learned to master the digital darkroom techniques.
I'm glad I did as it means I now have the choice of shooting in whatever mode might be best for the occasion.
I agree wholeheartedly with those who have said shooting RAW allows you to correct mistakes a little more and maybe salvage a special shot that can't be repeated. I agree whole heartedly with someone, I think it was Tannin, who said you sometimes have to consider the trade-offs and shoot high ISO jpgs for bursts of birds in flight ... something I forgot to do myself a couple of weeks ago and missed several potential Gull shots as I was shooting RAW and the camera/card read/write was too slow so I was having to wait too long between bursts.
I also agree it's an expensive business trying to keep up with the latest technologies - both hardware and software.
Its a wide and varied learning curve, lots of choices on all aspects. The most important thing, in my humble opinion, is that everyone should carry on enjoying their kit and their hobbies at their own pace...... and also enjoy sharing experiences, skills and photographs.
Pol