I'm of a different opinion. The question was about what a photographer might want, which may be different in many ways from what the program(s) may offer. A photographer may have a perfect understanding of raw conversion, but s/he may ~want~ something more or different. One thing has little or nothing to do with the other.
Shel > [Original Message] > From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Date: 4/7/2006 4:39:19 PM > Subject: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters > > On 7 Apr 2006 at 16:21, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > I can't believe the comments Aaron is getting in this thread. The original > > question (which was not posed by Aaron and which has yet to be acknowledged > > or answered as far as I can see), was: > > > > "What are some typical things you'd want to > > do if you had a RAW file and you wanted to > > make sure everything was okay before you > > saved it in the other format? We know the > > things the program can do, but we don't know > > what a photographer would actually want to do." > > > > That this simple question even got to the point where people started > > questioning, and in some cases, judging, Aaron's decision to shoot JPEG's > > ~in a specific situation~, is beyond my comprehension. > > At the moment I know I'm only getting bits of threads in my in-box, the list > seems to be a bit ragged again so I can only post answers to what I've read. In > any case, based on the original question, Graywolfs answer seems the most > fitting, particularly given the responses from the original poster.
