On 09/12/2015 03:22 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On the other hand very often the cameras are so intelligent that they produce quite optimal jpg's, especially if you have set it to highest quality and largest size. So for many images it might not be necessary to go thru the raw process, because the cameras result is already good enough.
I thought so, yes.
*sigh* The issue isn't "good" or bad" but which interpretation. If you read some of the online articles about RAW processing you'll see the variations that can be done with the the same RAW but very different end results. All "good" photographs but all different. Working with RAW and something like darktable - which yes, Daniel, has come a long way in the last couple of years (but perhaps not in the direction YOU specifically want, but isn't that always the case with software?) I've masked end enahnced and made so-so images into something displayable. And the camera's limited algorithms simply can't do that! -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org