Jan 28, 2015, 18:36
I have acknowledged here (and elsewhere) that raw files hold more data, giving more leeway for corrections and adjustments. However, in most cases the extra (excess) data is not essential when the image has been captured properly. The premium JPEGs from modern DSLRs still contain more than enough data for the processing needed to enhance them, without compromising the visible quality of the final result, when viewed normally rather than by pedantic pixel peeping.
Most of the examples quoted, to illustrate the benefits of using raw data, involve more extreme processing adjustments than I am suggesting here. They also often involve images resulting from errors that should have been avoided at the shooting stage, e.g. wrong white balance and wrong exposure. Nevertheless, and contrary to what many people think, JPEGs with serious mistakes can often be rescued to give a reasonable image.
E.g. This JPEG was shot with White Balance carelessly left on Tungsten from the previous night:
Processing that JPEG in first Adobe Camera Raw and then PaintShop Pro gave this image:
This is a 100% crop from the processed JPEG:
This is no work of art, but I think it would be a reasonable record shot to keep, if revisiting that historical location was not possible. Perhaps others could do better from raw data, but the facts remain - it was a silly error that I should not have made when shooting, and a correctly captured JPEG would have made a high quality photograph.
Cheers.
Philip
Most of the examples quoted, to illustrate the benefits of using raw data, involve more extreme processing adjustments than I am suggesting here. They also often involve images resulting from errors that should have been avoided at the shooting stage, e.g. wrong white balance and wrong exposure. Nevertheless, and contrary to what many people think, JPEGs with serious mistakes can often be rescued to give a reasonable image.
E.g. This JPEG was shot with White Balance carelessly left on Tungsten from the previous night:
Processing that JPEG in first Adobe Camera Raw and then PaintShop Pro gave this image:
This is a 100% crop from the processed JPEG:
This is no work of art, but I think it would be a reasonable record shot to keep, if revisiting that historical location was not possible. Perhaps others could do better from raw data, but the facts remain - it was a silly error that I should not have made when shooting, and a correctly captured JPEG would have made a high quality photograph.
Cheers.
Philip