![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/b4047644c59f2d63b88e9464c02743fd.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On February 19, 2015 10:34:15 AM PST, Anton Aylward
On 02/19/2015 10:51 AM, Joe Zappa wrote:
Bingo. Anyone who has worked with done their own enlargements in a darkroom with film would consider deleting RAW files and keeping JPGs to be as foolish as burning your negatives, while keeping the small contact prints from a proff sheet.
That is a very goo way of putting it.
The RAW files contain 12, 14, sometimes more, bit of information, whereas JPEGs only contain 8 bits. There is more metadata and what amounts to 'phase' information in RAW files. It much easier to do things like white balance, colour correction, when you have more bits to work with :-)
Regardless, well over 80% of the shots taken will never see the light of day, and you will write them to disk and view them once and never again look at them. Unless you fancy yourself the second coming of Ansel Adams (a hubris all too common among amateurs), there is seldom a need to retain the RAW image format. Unless you do it professionally you are fooling yourself. Which of course is your right. But professionals wouldn't be obsessing over inodes. They'd just get on with the job. -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org