Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ted, you got some very good explanations already, but lets try this (skip to the bottom if you want to read the punch line, as it were): in film imaging, the images are cut onto the film, then with the aids of some chemical soap, the images are fixed onto the film. With film photography, you have one chance to control how a latent image cut by the photons is to transform into a fixed image. Once you have the film (say a negative), then you use various printing techniques to get the print that you like in the printing process. This may involve using some filters etc. Now JPG: what you are getting from the camera is not just a fixed image, but it has gone through certain software processing that the camera makers deem to make the images pretty darn good without much additional work. Yes, the KISS principle. Think of it as the camera maker is saying here's your PRINTED image! You have some control on what kind of software processing are done by poking with the menu and whatnots, but even if you turn off all processing, there is still the process of converting the file into JPG. With JPG conversion, some information are thrown away. In theory, most people would not notice the difference, but nevertheless, some information is lost. With RAW data, it is not quite exactly the data that is recorded on the sensor, for some processing has to be done, but imagine you are looking at the latent image cut by the photons!!! Most of the time, you would apply a standard soap to get the image fixed, but if you want, now you can control how that latent image is fixed. May be you don't like the standard soap on this particular image. You can try something different. Xtol doesn't work? Well, redo it with HC-110! Think the image works better in color? No problem! There are ways to get to your JPG pictures from the RAW files fairly easily. After all, anything that can be done by the camera's teeny CPU on the fly can be done better using your PC's gigahertz processor. No biggie. RAW gives you more freedom, that's all. But you know how we always says, it's the photographer and not the camera gears? It really may be that "Best is the Enemy of Good Enough," and most of the time, you would want to use the KISS principle and use standard processing anyway. I don't think we will see better pictures per se from you if you start shooting RAW. It's like saying HCB's pictures would have been better if he has access to better film or the latest ASPH lens. Is RAW better? Sure it is, but then again, shooting with a tripod would get a sharper image. So why don't we shoot with tripods most of the time? Because it may not be practical or that it is just such a pain in the ass to use that you spend fighting with the tripod than catching Trudeau sliding down the rail. May be you will get frustrated with RAW converters and sitting in front of computer to get that image "just right." So may be after all, the KISS principle does win in the end. // richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, please use richard at imagecraft.com)