re: JPEG or RAW: Which Should You Choose?

Mike — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 20:21:14 GMT

"16-bit file RAW file has over 65,000 tones per channel. In color editing and in the final print, this can make a huge difference in the appearance of intense colors, such as open skies."

No, it can't. First of all, it is widely disputed on whether the human eye can actually perceive the difference between an 8-bit and a 16-bit file. Second, I have printed comparisons at 8X12 of an in-camera basic jpeg and a NEF file from a D200 (shot in raw+jpeg). I did some levels in CS3 prior to printing. I showed 3 people, including one of Canada's top landscape and nature photographers (someone who has been featured in National Graphic) and not even he could see the difference. Yes, there are visible differences on your monitor but that is due to looking at a 96 ppi screen.

"sRGB is not ideal for printing"

This kind of misinformation does a disservice to all photographers, especially newbies. sRGB is excellent for printing and this is why most minilabs and places like Costco use it. Adobe 1998 is suitable for sending to publications because it's space resembles CMYK more than sRGB but that does not mean it's superior.

Re: JPEG or RAW: Which Should You Choose?

jnbussell — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:21:00 GMT

I prefer JPEG