Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No, just stating a fact...
JPEG isn't the best format...just the easiest...
I see what you did there...you tried to make it about printing when that was never the point...
...........Raw-tiff(edit) and save as jpeg for printing (it they can't handle tiff) and web...
1) Raw is a studio album, JPEG is a live album. It's more unique and gutsy playing live and encompasses the moment.
2) People that revere Raw for its versatility seem to be the same people that poopoo Lytro for its similar versatility - snobs!
3) JPEG team may never see my photos but neither did Velvia team either ;-)
What's the expense? I can fit about 120 12.4mp raw files per 4gb of storage. Thats like four rolls of film in about 1/10 the physical space. Flash memory is at most, like $4.50/gb, or about $0.14/image.
What I like about this whole discussion is that the title is "is raw really worth it".
What's the expense? I can fit about 120 12.4mp raw files per 4gb of storage. Thats like four rolls of film in about 1/10 the physical space. Flash memory is at most, like $4.50/gb, or about $0.14/image.
There's time in processing, but if you batch process this is maybe 2 minutes per image, including data transfer which you have to do anyway. So yeah, it takes a little more time to process SOOC, but typically RAW processed images have better resolution, sharpness and flexibility - in case you, say, you forget to switch from daylight to incandescent - you'll have majorly screwed up the entire Wedding Reception. And if they had tungsten corrected florescent lighting, who friggin' known what the color settings should actually be - do you really trust your camera's goofy color meter to get it right?