Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="J-see" data-source="post: 376693" data-attributes="member: 31330">re: Do you shoot &quot;Raw&quot; or &quot;Jpeg&quot;I doubt it's possible to fine-tune a JPEG to come close to a RAW file. There are so little options in comparison and any judgement call we make, we do so on a 10$ LCD screen that is calibrated not to be as accurate as possible but to show the shot as clear as possible. It could be a nice challenge but I'd fear JPEG would stand no chance. Try fine-tuning it so that it overexposed only a portion of the shot or when doing architecture decreases the temperature of the granite while increasing the limestone.It's like trying to fine-tune a Fiat Uno in order to compete with the rest in Formula 1. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="J-see, post: 376693, member: 31330"] [b]re: Do you shoot "Raw" or "Jpeg"[/b] I doubt it's possible to fine-tune a JPEG to come close to a RAW file. There are so little options in comparison and any judgement call we make, we do so on a 10$ LCD screen that is calibrated not to be as accurate as possible but to show the shot as clear as possible. It could be a nice challenge but I'd fear JPEG would stand no chance. Try fine-tuning it so that it overexposed only a portion of the shot or when doing architecture decreases the temperature of the granite while increasing the limestone. It's like trying to fine-tune a Fiat Uno in order to compete with the rest in Formula 1. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification