On 2016-02-02 00:04, Anton Aylward wrote:
On 02/01/2016 05:24 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I can not generate the exact JPG the camera would have generated. For instance, a NEF typically has 20 MB. The corresponding JPG generated by the camera has 10 MB. The JPG generated by shotwell is only 2 or 3 MB.
They are different JPG, generated differently. I want to have both and decide which to use at use time. Not close doors in advance.
Again, I think you're missing the point.
No. I mean that I prefer the camera to create both formats, and also my computer to generate another jpg, and have them all. I don't see the advantage in telling the camera to not generate the jpg. Space? There is plenty. Speed? Not a problem here. While I can I prefer to have both generators.
Example: one of my areas of interest is macro photography of flowers. The city has many gardens and their contents change though the year. The are plant societies that hold events and competitions. Its a rich area. My cameras have "plant/macro" scene settings. Early on I did what you are claiming. The results ended up that about 0.5% of the time I kept the camera generated JPG. Even then, the version I edited from the RAW using Darktable was much more satisfactory. The only reason I could possibly think of for RAW+JPG is the need to immediately post to social media, as Bob pointed out. I haven't hit that and don't foresee it.
I have. :-) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)