JPEG is standard, contains same amount of color/light informationhhahahhahahahahahhahahahaha
yeah RAW is lossless, JPEG is not.Incorrect. Most cameras (all cameras?) - to my knowledge - save lossless jpegs.
what i mean to say is no, not by farActually you're right, but the RAW advantages are often overstated and overhyped. I did some experimenting myself, and yes, improperly exposed images contained more details in the darks in the RAW file. RAW is more flexible... no doubt. That said, it tends to be a waste of time if you're printing 4x6's.
Incorrect. Most cameras (all cameras?) - to my knowledge - save lossless jpegs.
Actually you're right, but the RAW advantages are often overstated and overhyped. I did some experimenting myself, and yes, improperly exposed images contained more details in the darks in the RAW file. RAW is more flexible... no doubt. That said, it tends to be a waste of time if you're printing 4x6's.
I was going to do this yesterday and I feel like kind of a jackass for bumping this but I wanted to clear this up. I wasn't even aware that there was a lossless format jpeg... it seems rather unnecessary as jpeg can be lossless as is.My experiment. Subject: my dog. (Click to reveal)Images on left are JPEG originals. Images on right are RAW. Both saved as PNG (lossless).
(http://gamingw.net/pubaccess/40555/bruiserjpeg.png)(http://gamingw.net/pubaccess/40555/bruiserraw.png)
(http://gamingw.net/pubaccess/40555/zoom1bruiserjpeg.png)(http://gamingw.net/pubaccess/40555/zoom1bruiserraw.png)
(http://gamingw.net/pubaccess/40555/zoom2bruiserjpeg.png)(http://gamingw.net/pubaccess/40555/zoom2bruiserraw.png)
As you can see, the pixel layout is identical -- indicating to me that there are no artifacts present from any sort of jpeg compression on the part of the camera. The pixel layout is lossless, as far as I am concerned.
also, it's different since you took the pictures in JPEG and converted them to RAW. Try taking it in RAW and converting it to JPEG.no... that's not what I did at all. That's what we would call 'impossible'.
The RAW picture was processed through Photoshop CS3. I matched the white balance and brightness as close as I could without getting too picky. Sorry if there's a little brightness variation... with a little more time, I could have made a perfect match. Also, I don't know if it matters, but the ones on the right are 16 bit PNGs, while the ones on the left are 8 bit.
Incorrect. Most cameras (all cameras?) - to my knowledge - save lossless jpegs.Nope. Very few cameras do. Many just save a very high-quality JPEG. It's close, but not entirely lossless (but often good enough). Note that this is for practical reasons; very few programs can even decode lossless JPEG.
Actually you're right, but the RAW advantages are often overstated and overhyped.If you're a professional or a slightly more serious amateur, this is absolutely untrue. The lighting conditions of the scene you're shooting are never perfect. If you save your image in JPEG, you'll lose your chance to adjust it without giving up some quality later.