IM GONNA DO IT
IM GONNA SHOOT IN RAW WITHOUT JPG COPIES
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Greenshot Image-Specific Properties:
>>2741419
GOD BLESS YOU
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Image-Specific Properties:
ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US
>>2741428
soonds loch a personal failure
>G O O B L E
>O
>B
>B
>L
>E
Just get a Mac, all the standard software on Mac will read most raw files.
>>2741465
>just spend thousands on a mediocre computer so that you don't have to download some plugins
>>2741498
MAC = CAM backwards. They belong to each other, PC fag.
>>2741419
Guys, he's doing it!
That's too much to handle!
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 96 dpi Vertical Resolution 96 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 300 Image Height 300 Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2741498
>implying that OS X isn't the best x86 OS
M8 pls
>>2741419
BITE THE PILLOW
I'M SHOOTING IN RAW
>>2741544
>he doesn't know about TempleOS
>>2741419
I was doing it for almost 5 years since I got Fujifilm S100FS.
>>2741419
Is this uncommon? The ability to deal with white balance entirely in post alone makes raw shooting worth it to me.
>>2741544
>not using Gentoo
topkek
I think I'm gonna start doing this too. I don't even look at my JPEG copies anymore... they just take up space on my hard drive.
Why would you want jpeg copies in the first place? The only cameras it makes sense for is fujifilm.
>>2741589
on lolympus, you have to shoot raw+large jpeg to be able to zoom the image in playback mode to maximum magnification
Well... You know I usually forget that my camera is in RAW+jpeg mode. I literally never use the jpegs.
I'll turn that mode off now. Thanks OP.
#I will smash your face with a hammer
>>2741602
That's a weird design flaw for such an innovative brand.
>>2741609
They didn't bother implementing the rendering of actual raw data in playback mode. So if you shoot raw only, in playback mode you'll be looking at a half-res jpeg preview embedded in the raw.
Don't know if this is fixed in the newest cameras like E-M1 though.
>>2741578
Main reason I shoot raw is just so I don't have to waste time adjusting white balance when I shoot.
>>2741715
I just sort of accepted the fact that you can only get it only so good enough in camera and that the final step really is post-processing
coming from the more regarded medium of film because of its romantic "authenticity" where digitizing negatives requires even more extra work and sliders than processing a RAW file out of camera I found that easy to accept.
>>2741724
>I just sort of accepted the fact that you can only get it only so good enough in camera and that the final step really is post-processing
This is true especially because my manual white balance settings go in increments of 50k, so fine tuning is almost always necessary.
I shot film seriously for a couple of years and I really enjoyed printing black and white 35mm negatives because of how accessible and yet how challenging/rewarding it could be. Large format was just a hot mess and it almost didn't feel worth it. I was originally attracted to it for the movements more than anything but I will honestly say I didn't see enough of a difference between a LF scan and what digital can do to warrant all the hassle, especially driving 30 minutes south of here to spend another $20 to develop a whopping 10 shots of color that I got in a box on B&H for $40.
