Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 377773" data-attributes="member: 12496">Well, mine often are not.&nbsp; <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; And it is so easy to output JPG from Raw at anytime (batch processing, etc). We are normally also resampling then anyway.&nbsp; &nbsp; And the camera writing more files takes more time, slowing it.&nbsp; And it fills the card faster (although JPG is almost negligible size compared to Raw).&nbsp; So you get a USB 3.0 card reader, and you're in business. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />Really, for me, the argument would be the necessity of wading through all those unnecessary files, trying to sort it out.&nbsp;&nbsp; I doubt I would ever even look at the JPG.I don't think the right arguments are being presented...Raw processing is so easy.&nbsp; If you really want Vivid, you can set Vivid in the software too.&nbsp; Or better, you can do it individually, based on what it actually looks like.&nbsp;&nbsp; It is harder to Undo Vivid done in the camera. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; But more important, the camera is not often precise.&nbsp; Tools are crude.&nbsp; &nbsp; Perfect White Balance is almost impossible, except maybe bright sun. We don't know the color in the first place, and can't set it right anyway.&nbsp; Yeah, I know about Custom WB and shooting a white card, but that's awkward, and those avoiding processing are not going to do that either.&nbsp; And reflective metering is not very precise, small adjustments are often needed. It makes such a difference to get WB and exposure right on.&nbsp; &nbsp; It is so easy and fast and good, to simply just do what you see is needed.&nbsp; It is a Day and Night benefit.And another HUGE benefit is the ability to edit (process) many multiple files at once.&nbsp; I usually think of it as correcting, not editing.&nbsp; I usually don't do much other than correcting WB and tweaking exposure and cropping (there is vastly more that can be done).&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; I am not aware Nikon software does multiple files, but Adobe does.&nbsp; If you have many pictures in same situation, a flash session or whatever, one click can correct WB on all of them.&nbsp;&nbsp; It is so easy and fast and good.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 377773, member: 12496"] Well, mine often are not. :) And it is so easy to output JPG from Raw at anytime (batch processing, etc). We are normally also resampling then anyway. And the camera writing more files takes more time, slowing it. And it fills the card faster (although JPG is almost negligible size compared to Raw). So you get a USB 3.0 card reader, and you're in business. :) Really, for me, the argument would be the necessity of wading through all those unnecessary files, trying to sort it out. I doubt I would ever even look at the JPG. I don't think the right arguments are being presented... Raw processing is so easy. If you really want Vivid, you can set Vivid in the software too. Or better, you can do it individually, based on what it actually looks like. It is harder to Undo Vivid done in the camera. :) But more important, the camera is not often precise. Tools are crude. Perfect White Balance is almost impossible, except maybe bright sun. We don't know the color in the first place, and can't set it right anyway. Yeah, I know about Custom WB and shooting a white card, but that's awkward, and those avoiding processing are not going to do that either. And reflective metering is not very precise, small adjustments are often needed. It makes such a difference to get WB and exposure right on. It is so easy and fast and good, to simply just do what you see is needed. It is a Day and Night benefit. And another HUGE benefit is the ability to edit (process) many multiple files at once. I usually think of it as correcting, not editing. I usually don't do much other than correcting WB and tweaking exposure and cropping (there is vastly more that can be done). I am not aware Nikon software does multiple files, but Adobe does. If you have many pictures in same situation, a flash session or whatever, one click can correct WB on all of them. It is so easy and fast and good. [/QUOTE]

Verification