The default rendering from the RAW converter will probably be much less satisfactory than a jpg straight from the camera.
You can probably bet on that being the fact.
The processes going on in-camera to build that JPEG is very complex and sophisticated (and proprietary). That's why you don't hear people in mass scream about how they hate the JPEGs, they are often quite good (making me wonder why so many techniques are out there to fix these butt-awful images I see. Where did they come from? My 83 year old mom takes better quality JEPGs). Anyway, as you say, its a moot point, why would anyone shoot Raw then take the time to use a Raw processor and not touch any of the rendering settings or use the default?
Originally Posted by BinaryFx "The default rendering from the raw image that Pindy posted makes a good example for another apply image move, using the third commonly available colour mode in Photoshop - CMYK."
Andrew Rodney replied:
"It serves to prove an important point, don't think the default renderings of a Raw file are anything close to what you want from the scene referred data..."
To be clear, I was using a posted image as a segway to introducing blending CMYK K channel data into an RGB file - with this type of Apply Image move being the topic of the thread, while Andrew was using my post as a segway to promote raw rendering, which is an offshoot of the original topic which is not about Apply Image.
Although the image in question does exist as a raw camera file, this does not mean that every image starts this way or that one can have access to this file, even if it does exist. Sometimes one has to edit in Photoshop, other times it will be in a raw converter, either from Adobe or from another company that the user prefers for either workflow or conversion results (better colour, more detail or whatever).
Comments
You can probably bet on that being the fact.
The processes going on in-camera to build that JPEG is very complex and sophisticated (and proprietary). That's why you don't hear people in mass scream about how they hate the JPEGs, they are often quite good (making me wonder why so many techniques are out there to fix these butt-awful images I see. Where did they come from? My 83 year old mom takes better quality JEPGs). Anyway, as you say, its a moot point, why would anyone shoot Raw then take the time to use a Raw processor and not touch any of the rendering settings or use the default?
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
To be clear, I was using a posted image as a segway to introducing blending CMYK K channel data into an RGB file - with this type of Apply Image move being the topic of the thread, while Andrew was using my post as a segway to promote raw rendering, which is an offshoot of the original topic which is not about Apply Image.
Although the image in question does exist as a raw camera file, this does not mean that every image starts this way or that one can have access to this file, even if it does exist. Sometimes one has to edit in Photoshop, other times it will be in a raw converter, either from Adobe or from another company that the user prefers for either workflow or conversion results (better colour, more detail or whatever).
Both approaches have their place.
Stephen Marsh
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/