Raw Vs. JPG

[boomtap]

For pictures of what RAW can do if you underexpose.

Why RAW mode ROCKS!

Tim

Great example!

So basically since the raw files is the image right from the camera, more post processing can be done because the image still contains more data than the JPG. And the image will be more responsive to corrections just as if you were correcting them in the camera?

[Ronnoco]

Great example!

So basically since the raw files is the image right from the camera, more post processing can be done because the image still contains more data than the JPG. And the image will be more responsive to corrections just as if you were correcting them in the camera?

No, the RAW file has been converted in the camera from analogue to digital, so it is not direct. Post processing is different in that RAW post processing is global and requires balancing areas of the photo. With jpeg you can selectively process different parts of the photo separately. The difference in image responsiveness to the corrections is one of global versus selectivity. With RAW you need to be able to see how one correction may cause another problem and control it. Not easy for all photographers.

Ronnoco

[SmartWombat]

No, the RAW file has been converted in the camera from analogue to digital, so it is not direct.

It's as direct as you can get out of the camera, with today's technology it's got to be digitised and not stored in analogue form. There is a fair amount of analogue processing between the sensor cell and the A/D converter(s), different depending on whether it's CCD or CMOS.

With jpeg you can selectively process different parts of the photo separately.

I think it's not a function of the format, but of the tools you use. Most RAW tools are concerned with global adjustments to curves, levels, colours and not image editing.

Most editing programs will not allow you to save in a camera manufacturer's RAW format (I've not found one that can, but that doesn't mean there isn't one out there somewhere).

Post processing is different in that RAW post processing is global and requires balancing areas of the photo.

At what point, having loaded a RAW image into software, does it stop being RAW?

I can load a RAW image into Photoshop, or GIMP, or FastStone, or ThumbsPlus - each program has different editing abilities, all will save in lossy or lossless formats but not RAW.

The difference in image responsiveness to the corrections is one of global versus selectivity.

I would say not in image responsiveness, but in features of the tools that manipulate that format - either globally in the case of RAW tools, or selectively in the case of mamge editors.
All image editors I've used have global change options - the differentiation is that typical RAW tools do not have selective editing functions that work on only part of the image.