Visual advantages of shooting RAW

I have found several good web sites and discussion threads on BPN dealing with RAW including:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...aw-files.shtml
and Juan's Power of Raw - http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...antages+of+RAW. I really appreciated the visual demonstration of what RAW can do to save a photograph.

I was hoping someone has a referral to another resource with similar visual comparisons between RAW shots and JPEGS side by side with the same equipment.

Intellectually it seems logical there is lots to be gained, I'm still one of those who has not had the motivation (financially) to switch to RAW from JPEGs. I am hoping there are some image comparisons out there that can sway me.

Thanks.

Hi Cal. I don't understand the financial motivation required to use RAW as cameras come with software to do RAW conversion so there is no additional cost to it. If you are using Lightroom or a version of Photoshop, ACR is part of it already. The only cost I can see is the time to include the step in your workflow.

FWIW, in the March 2010 issue of the Black + White Photography magazine, a British magazine, it has an article on RAW Vs Jpeg. The conclusion is Fine Jpeg is as good as RAW in terms of image quality. I suppose it means if you nail it that is. David Ziser, a wedding photographer, shoots jpeg for his jobs. I also read many sport photogs for the press and magazines also shoot jpeg.

Remember that jpeg works in 8 bit ! That is a severe hit quality wise, no question.

For doing weddings I can see the advantage since they shoot in control conditions and not very much color plus the convenience of having the images set up in camera as you wish. Nature is a different ballgame.

Here's another fun read by Ken Rockwell discussing RAW and JPEG. A lot of people disagree with him, in general and just on principle :) . Also check out some of the other things he writes.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm
Tom

Hi Cal
I mostly shoot in jpeg because of lack of space in my computer.
All I can suggest is to go to local park or lake or river and take a bunch of pix in RAW/JPEG and edit the best images for the best results you can get and then compare.
I do this with Noiseware, Noise Ninja and Topaz Denoise.
Might be an idea to get some good sized prints to settle which are the preferred results.
Cheers: Ian Mc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Graham

Here's another fun read by Ken Rockwell discussing RAW and JPEG. A lot of people disagree with him, in general and just on principle :) .

---

Be careful with Rockwell. He isn't above deliberately misleading readers. He says so on his site:

While often inspired by actual products and events, just like any other good news organization, I like
to make things up and stretch the truth if they make an article more fun.... If you lack a good BS detector
or sense of humor, please treat this entire site as a work of fiction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cal Walters

I am hoping there are some image comparisons out there that can sway me.

---

Cal,

Greetings. Just imagine you're shooting some egrets out on an estuary in some early morning sun... at the corner of your eye you catch some movement in some tall grasses shaded by some nearby trees... It's that elusive Clapper Rail or Least Bittern that you've always wanted... in the deep shadows... just enough light for a couple of clicks before it moves off into the grass. A perfect capture... except you didn't have time to change your WB :eek: if only WB adjustments in jpegs were any thing like the quality of raw conversion adjustments... sigh.

;)

Cheers,

-Michael-