that's why i try to get it right in the camera and most times i do you can still adjust wb tint etc to a lesser degree anyway .
as it causes argument's lol
Not necessarily - with something like Photoshop you can use adjustment layers, whose effects are combined into one hit at the time of saving ...?
I shoot jpeg fine and Raw.
Mr Fuji and I have an agreement that if I tell him exactly what I want, he'll give me exactly what I want, and this agreement usually works well. The raws exist to cover the occasional miscommunication between us.
Unless you shoot film !
Technically film is RAW it needs processing before it can be shared.
I could say people shoot raw because they can't get it right in camera but i won't say that
I've in the past shot film as a Hybrid process which I really enjoy but have always had an internal fight with the thought of shooting analogue and then still ending up with a digital image and costing me much more to do it when I could have just shot with Digital to start with . With the cost of Film rising regularly shooting digital only has finally won the war.
What I meant was with film you need to develop it before anyone can see the image even with slide just as with RAW you need to put it through a RAW converter of some kind before most can see the image. In the film days the printing process was something like the PP on digital files in somuchas you started with the neg and created a pring the way you wanted it to look, hence my likening film to RAW shooting.
Perhaps oddly, the cave paintings I've seen images of were more accurate than most people's photographs today. The perpetrators weren't trying to output half-baked replicas as most of us do - they were spot-on. It was great art, with feeling distilled into an essence, and grounded enough to be spiritual, if that makes sense to anybody. These days, we go shopping a lot for cameras, then just waste time p***ing about with them, by comparison.
The professions have been manipulating images since the Daguerreotype. I expect even Roman painters used a bit of artistic license and old cave paintings were hardly accurate (I assume)
I've been working with the Getty entertainment team from Germany for a few years and they are jpg only (red carpet events, fashion etc). The whole workflow is jpg and they put a lot of effort into setting up the camera precisely for that - white balance and tint adjustments, etc. As a result, it's extremely fast, if you're set up correctly, you can send the finished pictures directly from the camera over the network with a voice note detailing the talent in the shot.
The benchmark for me (in colour work) is that significant highlight areas aren't blown.
You can choose how your camera firmware functions for exposure metering to get the exposure you want, no?
With Canon, they provide in-camera adjustment possibilities and a "Picture Style Editor" app that you can use to create your own presets. The app gives more control including tone curve and HSL controls for RYGCBM and HSL and tone curve for specific colors if you need that too.
The professions have been manipulating images since the Daguerreotype. I expect even Roman painters used a bit of artistic license and old cave paintings were hardly accurate (I assume)
