Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tina Manley wrote: > At 10:01 PM 5/20/2005, you wrote: > >> Why shoot RAW? It's nothing but a pain in the ass and more work! >> >> My routine when handling digital images on the computer? JPEG >> > > > Sorry to be late but I just caught up with this thread. No, Ted!! > I'm sorry but I very much disagree here. > > Would you make a print from a negative and then destroy the > negative because you had the print? > > A JPEG or Tiff is the print equivalent of a digital RAW negative. True for JPEG, Entirely false for TIFF. > You can develop the RAW negative many different ways with the > software that is available now. Who knows what will be available > in the future! With a RAW file (negative) you will be able to take > advantage of any improvements in conversion software just like you > can now use old negatives to continue to make better and better > prints with the technology that is available. > > RAW is always the way to go unless you are just taking snapshots > that you never intend to use again. TIFF is a full fidelity way to store images. Of course one *can* store a low fidelity image with TIFF, but with TIFF one can also store an *equally* full fidelity image to that of RAW. TIFF (IMHO) is the best way to store images for archival purposes. The workflow is this: RAW -> lossless conversion -> TIFF -- the key here is the *lossless conversion* step. Jonathan