View Single Post
Old 06-02-2012, 07:33 PM   #32 (permalink)
Cmike2780
A True Z Fanatic
 
Cmike2780's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 5,059
Drives: slowwww
Rep Power: 28
Cmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond reputeCmike2780 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacCool View Post
Of course. Artistic vision starts in the field but it doesn't end there for images that are important to the shooter. And if one is going to post-process in order to make the picture reflect what the shooter wants it to reflect, better to do it in RAW. Post-processing images shot in JPEG requires that you undo what the camera has decided about color, sharpness, white balance, and exposure, or even worse, try to overlay your own processing concepts on the decisions the camera has already made about those aspects.

Certainly I don't advocate post-processing every image one shoots. The majority of mine don't even get past the thumbnail stage. When I find an image that I like in my camera, I want to be the one who decides how it's going to print up, not my camera, or worse, KodakGallery (now Shutterfly, I guess) or Whitehouse Color.
I never said it ended in the field. I just don't agree with the whole "l'll fix it in post" attitude.....and let me make it perfectly clear since you are under the impression that I have something against shooting in RAW, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST IT! I just find it overkill in this thread about a guy just starting out. 9 times out of 10, someone who's just starting out in photography won't be able to use the extra data in a RAW file to their benefit. They'll spend hours adjusting every aspect and come up with an image that looks just as good as the jpeg. It would be like letting someone drive an F-1 car and expecting him to know what he's doing and achieve the results of a pro.

For a professional fotog, it really depends on what you're shooting. Some sports photographers for example, need the speed without slowing down the buffer. In a setting like fashion or portraits, shooting RAW is the obvious choice. It's a controlled setting and large file sizes isn't as much of an issue.

I shoot mostly in jpeg because for me, it's good enough. I'm not a pro, an artist, a seasoned vet, nor claim to know everything about this field. I wasn't even alive in the 70's. This is just a hobby to me. The closest my images will ever come to a gallery is my hallway... and I'm fine with that.
__________________
[09][MB][6-Spd MT][Touring][Stillen Gen III][K&N][Borla CBE][Evo-R]

Cmike2780 is offline   Reply With Quote