Please bear in mind that I'm speaking from a place of ignorance, but it would seem to me that the difference between JPEG and RAW may be discerned when making larger prints. Might this not be the case? After all, a puny (by comparison) 8 x 10 print on a home inkjet, regardless of the quality of the printer, is not going to show as much detail or problems as a much larger print made on, perhaps, an even higher quality printer.
Shel Belinkoff > [Original Message] > From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Because if one is printing out using a current top of the line inkjet > printer, there is no way that the difference in resolution between RAW > and jpeg can be discerned. As has been pointed out to me, RAW gives > better post-production possibilities. Not a good enough reason for me to > shoot RAW. More care at the taking stage means no problems later.
