Cory, did you read my post? I said NOTHING about anti-RAW, I said that FOR
MY USE of the camera it was not the correct choice.
Yes I did... my comment was more rhetorical to the large number of
comments with that sentiment. Yours just happened to be the latest... :)
I don't think anyone is trying to tell you your way to do things
is crap... to each their own. More a clarification that if you are
judging the quality of a DSLR to be inadequate based on the JPEGs it
produces, you may not have an accurate representation of its capabilities.
No matter how streamlined your workflow, 800 RAW images will take a long time
to process. Do you not agree? Do you not agree in a situation where the
light can never change unless there's a blackout, considering all images must
be uploaded immediately after the event, that RAW is not a sensible choice?
Sure there are situations like that. The original theme was
something like "getting the most out of your DSLR." That's contrary to
your suggested mode of operation. If you are absolutely sure that you
will never, ever have any need at all to post-process any of the images,
then JPEG is the correct way to do it... especially when you've got fixed
lighting situations like you suggest. If you screwed up your WB setting
at the onset of the shoot (which isn't easily detectable from the LCD of
course), you'd be pretty friggin' pissed after you shot 800 images of
them, though.
Of course, this hasn't even touched on the interpolation algorithm
quality of camera vs. RAW converter either. It's been well-established
that Pentax DSLRs have pretty soft JPEG images.
Whatever floats your 'scope, dude.
-Cory
--
*************************************************************************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
*************************************************************************
