RAW heresy?  Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread Regular
MemberPosts: 188 Re: A simple film analogy In reply to stevo23,
6 months ago  stevo23 wrote:  The Raw/Jpeg analogy is better
expressed as: RAW is like your negative and jpeg is like the
prints you might have gotten from the negatives. One comes from
the other. The negatives will have all you can get out of your
capture while the prints are limited by the lab's choice of
paper/exposure/development process etc.  I've read essentially
the same analogy many times, but I think it is misleading.  Raw
begins like a negative but you can do many more things to it
than you ever could to a film negative. If you make modest
processing choices, then yes, it sort of mirrors what a
developer used to do with film. But if you make dramatic
adjustments, they may well not have been possible with any
conventional film developing technique. Therefore the
implication that RAW=negative="purity" is a bit misleading.  You
could say that JPEG represents a "developed" print