Anyone use RAW

cosmicdebris · December 27, 2005 9:33AM

As their Camera setting for images? Straight from the CCD with no processing.Looks good to me.

sumnom · December 27, 2005 9:36AM

Not bad, not bad at all.

cacheman · December 27, 2005 9:40AM

Hot cha cha...I got a million of 'em....

mgoodm3 · December 27, 2005 9:44AM

Nice. RAW does make a difference.

coinpictures · December 27, 2005 9:52AM

Aren't you just replacing one set of processing with another? By using RAW, you're bypasssing the camera's conversion to TIF or JPEG, but in order to get it to post here, it still has to be converted, whether it be by Photoshop, PainShop Pro, or software that came with the camera.

The downside is that RAW files are [CENSORED] huge!

What's the advantage?

In order to make a valid comparison, we'd have to see side by side RAW and JPEG files with the same lighting and exposure to see if there's any real difference. The picture above is gorgeous, but that doesn't mean it has anything to do with RAW...

cosmicdebris · December 27, 2005 10:45AM

True but with raw I get a RAW image that has not been tweaked with at all to begin with.

Anyone use RAW

Comments