> On Thu, December 1, 2005 22:06, Cotty wrote: > ... > I'm aware of the extra 'latitude' that RAW has to offer, but for the > sort of stuff I shoot, I'm not fussed. I pay a bit more attention to > exposure, and bracket where necessary.
This got me thinking. For the sake of correct exposure, what would be your best bet: RAW or bracketed JPEG's? I know, you could even argue if there is such a thing as correct exposure, considering it is partly depending on taste. I've tried to sum up some arguments for both: With RAW, you need only one shot so you can get the shot you want without the risk of getting it wrong while bracketing. RAW gives extra latitude, also in between the "brackets" ;-). For file size, there's an interesting issue: what's bigger 2-3 JPEGs or 1 RAW file? Personally, I'd tend to use RAW in a case where otherwise bracketing would be required. It just gives more freedom and reduces the chance of missing the shot I want. Considering this, is it sensible to have the bracketing function on a DSLR? Wouldn't it be better to shoot in RAW and have the option to do bracketing as post-processing (outside the camera)? Maybe have the option in-camera to view the histograms from the RAW file as they would be after bracketing? On the other hand, currently, my only digital Canon is a A95 - RAW is not even available. So with my EOS30 I'll just keep on bracketing in the few cases where I think I need it... Cheers, Stefan * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
