4 ms·
> Shooting raw is a huhe and obvious improvement if you want to post-process in almost any way. See, you are saying “want to post-process”, which to me says th
by strogonoff 1y ago
> Shooting raw is a huhe and obvious improvement if you want to post-process in almost any way.
See, you are saying “want to post-process”, which to me says that there is a different priority present rather than just “simplicity and ease of use”.
If the priority is “making the photos look the way you want them to look”, then we are in a territory where it is not as simple as “this tool is easy to use and therefore a better choice than that tool”.
- Mashimo 1y agoIt's not binary. You can want post-processing, but also don't want to spend 50 hours to learn a tool. Sometimes you just want "make it look close to the in camera jpeg, but let me adjust to exposure" It's not that complex.
- strogonoff 1y agoIt’s not binary is the point and the whole reason I asked the original commenter why put premium into simplicity and ease and then immediately violate that by shooting raw.
- Mashimo 1y agoDo you understand him now?
- strogonoff 1y agoWithout him or her answering my question? Hardly.
- Mashimo 1y agoHe, or rather we, want access to most of the benefits of editing raw files, but with an easy to learn UX. Even if it means giving up on the last 10%. This concept is pretty common, not even limited to photography.
- igouy 1y agoWhen is the priority not “making the photos look the way you want them to look” ? When you say “simplicity and ease of use” I think that includes taking the photos, and if I can defer some decisions that might make the overall process simpler.