tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4441298819361810666.post3954037347860740389..comments2023-05-03T10:48:02.531+02:00Comments on The PhotoZone: The RAW Truth - Part 3Alistair Scotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01451574506124547294noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4441298819361810666.post-1702499419469739712009-10-13T12:05:01.716+02:002009-10-13T12:05:01.716+02:00Some good points based on your experiences. Thanks...Some good points based on your experiences. Thanks James.Alistair Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01451574506124547294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4441298819361810666.post-80807706192484301792009-10-13T10:44:38.197+02:002009-10-13T10:44:38.197+02:00I was shooting digital for about a year before cho...I was shooting digital for about a year before choosing RAW. There were a few obstacles - my initial explorations were using Canon's bundled conversion software. It was slow and fiddly, but I could definitely see the potential and control that it offered. I then tried DPP, which was Canon's free and greatly improved (fast!) processor, and integrated that into my workflow. <br /><br />Initially - like most learners - I used it to tweak exposure (and still do, to a lesser extent) but as time has gone on I've got to know the camera's quirks a little better, and normal outdoor daylight shooting causes me few problems, in fact I barely touch the raw image at all and just convert it straight to tif or jpg for work in Photoshop.<br /><br />However, for those situations where I'm not so comfortable, it's saved my neck countless times, such as indoors, night time, and available light. The ability to change white balance so easily (as your fireman example shows) is something I've never managed to master in photoshop so RAW is worth it for that alone, in my eyes!<br /><br />JamesSulmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02524098200119978085noreply@blogger.com