Jpeg Image quality

[Jon, The Elder]

Because a hobbyist who knows how to set up their camera can shoot jpeg and not really miss much of anything.

dEARlEADER.....you might want to go back and read the OP's beginning. Doesn't say a thing about RAW vs. Jpeg. It is about .Jpeg quality settings

 

[dEARlEADER]

dEARlEADER.....you might want to go back and read the OP's beginning. Doesn't say a thing about RAW vs. Jpeg. It is about .Jpeg quality settings

sorry Jon.... I thought your statement inferred the use of RAW as the only way to shoot with DSLR....

 

[Jeff Canes]

IMO if the exposure is correct straight out of the camera JPG is fine most of the time

 

[dEARlEADER]

Except of course the ability to edit a photo without causing posterisation due to the low bitrate. I wonder if any D300 owners post this question. After all 14bit NEFs are a huge selling point for higher end DSLRs.

funny.. i don't seem to miss all them bits..... and my jpegs don't look like Frakenstien after the small amount of editing I do to them....

strange world....

 

[Garbz]

Ah yes, another JPEG vs RAW debate filled with all of the usual nonsense, especially about JPEGs!

Nonsense is only nonsense if it is not true or related to the topic at hand. For every photo you post not effected by posterisation I'm sure I can find one that is. If it hasn't effected you then good for you and I hope you continue your lucky streak, however this is not fiction, nonesense, or even in some circumstances a case small enough to ignore.

The fact is any changes involve algorithms that make estimations. In many situations these estimations cause posterisation, in many situations they don't. If you have a higher bitrate to begin with then the estimations are based more on actual values than on estimates and thus lower posterisation effects.

dEARIEADER posterisation doesn't mean Frankenstein photos until you edit something out of the photography realm and into graphical art, at which point the posterisation itself looks like an artistic effect. Pushing or pulling half a stop here and there is not likely to show anything.

It's about latitude people. If you're happy with your editing and rarely need to break out some massive curve work which would benefit from the extra data then enjoy. Me I prefer having the extra data to work with when I need it. I never keep it. I archive in JPEG in the end anyway, but is the extra bitspace really going to take up that much more space on our cheap 8gb cards?

 

[Jon, The Elder]

It's about latitude people.

Yup.....and the rest of Garbz answer works for me.