4 ms·
A decade later, so the situation is different. Nonetheless I disagree. The flexibility raw provides for fixing it later is amazing. “Rescuing” a poorly exposed
by totoglazer 5y ago
A decade later, so the situation is different. Nonetheless I disagree. The flexibility raw provides for fixing it later is amazing. “Rescuing” a poorly exposed image from RAW can be like pulling a rabbit from a hat. The JPG just explodes.
One key difference: RAW files aren’t much bigger, but our SD cards have gone up a unit, from MB to GB. Our network connections and storage speeds are up 10x as well.
A second key difference: much more stability in formats. Longer generations, DNG means you’re unlikely to encounter anything too weird anymore.
- NikolaNovak 5y agoYup; Ubiquitous SSD drives and (relatively) cheap RAM also help. Would I suggest most of my family shoot RAW - heck no; I don't want that headache :). But if you're a enthusiast, student, or professional; if you want to learn and eek out the best photos, go RAW. Capture all data you can. Afford yourself the most opportunities today, tomorrow and down the road. You don't want to take that one perfect casual shot of bride's smile or that brilliant sunset or that amazing moment with your kids, only to find out you were under exposed or your white balance was wonky and you blew your highlights or lost your shadows and everybody is a purple dinosaur.