On 13/12/13 16:51, David Vincent-Jones wrote: > My experience: jpgs, from my Canon camera, do not fully reflect reality > anyway, they are only the manufacturers 'best guess' and in many
Agreed, I haven't shot a jpg in years, because I'm not interested in reality, but what I saw (or perceived) in the scene, which almost never matches reality. Like the esteemed Ansel Adams. You have to realise that there are simply so many limitations with photography when it comes to rendering a scene anything like how a human would, in fact it's a fundamentally different thing. A photo is an instant in time, frozen. The dynamic range of a digital photo is tiny compared to the human eye, and the dynamic range of photographic paper even tinier[1]. Anyway, I like the colour I can get from my RAWs so much more that I really couldn't give two hoots what the JPG would have looked like. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Xanb3J81EA ^ That's a technical lecture on the Ansel Adams zone system (among other things) which is brilliant at describing dynamic range if you have the patience to sit through it. Regards, Rob ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list Darktable-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
