BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Roy C" data-source="post: 1421223" data-attributes="member: 18798">Imans, I suspect that other people could explain this better than me but here goes.It is not so easy as comparing two shots.What Raw is all about is you taking full control of all the processing instead of letting the camera do it for you as in the case of jpeg.If you were to take a Jpeg and Raw file straight from the camera and just converted the raw then the jpeg would probably look better because the Raw would be unprocessed whereas a jpeg has had the processing already done by the Camera. How good a converted Raw looks after processing is down to the  processing ability of the person, you cannot really compare a jpeg and Raw in the way you suggest. Raw in itself is no guarantee to better images, you must have the processing abilities to take advantage of it. Think of a Raw as a digital negative - a jpeg from the Camera has lost much of the original shooting information  and what you get is what the Camera thinks you want. All the information tossed away when producing the jpeg is lost forever but the  Raw file retains all the information as recorded at the time of the shot much like a film negative. It is down to you to develop this negative.If you are not comfortable with some of the finer arts of processing and are not prepared to spend more time on the PC then Raw is not for you.<a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml" target="_blank">Read here</a> for further reading on the subject which explains the advantages of Raw far better than I could.Hope this helps.</blockquote>

Verification