U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | "Raw" for dummies ?

"Raw" for dummies ?



On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Don Bryant wrote:

.... the image quality
is good, as long as light level isn't low or the noise is quite high, and it
does give you RAW: the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1.
AFAIK, the picture quality of my Canon (I forget the numbers & keep them taped up, but I think PS 5) is fine, though I never have done RAW -- I haven't felt the need. I've been told it's more trouble than it's worth, which I sincerely hope is true -- but that could be my ignorance.

Could someone do a very brief "raw for dummies" -- once over lightly, why I should use it, why it's better than just ad hoc touch-up/ adjustments in Photoshop (and sometimes not even that)? How much do folks really use it, or is it mostly just nice to know it's there ?

I'm not aware of any "noise" problem, though washed out highlights are rampant. Can "raw" help that?

Anyway, it seems to me you have to know in advance... to choose either raw or jpeg format when shooting. But how do I know if I should have done it in raw until I've seen the file on the monitor?

TIA,

Judy

====================================================================
[Read My T-Shirt] for President: A True History of the Political Front and Back, by Judy Seigel. For relevant particulars see,

www.frontandbackpress.com
.............................................................
"I'd recommend it for a Pulitzer Prize, except I lack the credentials."