28/03/2026
I have Canon cameras. Invariably I record in RAW giving me the possibility to make deeper corrections, compared to JPG. I endeavor to get the first image capture correctly, therefore it is rare i need to do post editing, except for lens error correction that the camera cannot cope with IB, and a bit of cropping
Today (28.03.2026) I think I have a change of mind. Instead of looking at RAW as a means of manipulation if I need it, and assuming it was cheating if I used it at all. Now, I look at it as a negative, the same as analogue film. It's process was often adjusted to suite the users needs.
All the camera settings are stored in the RAW image file. These setting can be altered as if they were done by the camera. I understand there are more settings possible and these are often used to excess to create, what I refer to as fake.
If you have preconceptions of the value of RAW, or wondered why many camera manufacturers have their own version of RAW, then this link will be of interest to you.
A long time coming -- DNG for all.