Re: What do you consider to be the purest form of digital image capture?
Pixelpuffin wrote:
As per title
I seem to be drowning in so much post edited work.
I hanker after the real thing
What do you propose is the purest form of digital image capture without the need or reliance of computers.
Is it JPEG sooc
Or is it RAW converted to JPEG in camera.
I’ve had a gutful of super sharp super saturated nonsense. I can’t afford to go back to film… way to costly these days
Any advice?
Throughout the history of photography (not approaching 200 years), post-processing has been regarded as being as integral to the medium as clicking the shutter at the time of exposure.
If you don’t like pos-processing, that’s fine – just as it is fine to write and not proofread or edit. But not doing anything beyond what you do at the time of capture is no more “pure” photography than using all of the tools that are available to us.
By the way, when you “shoot jpg,” you are shooting “RAW converted to JPEG in camera.” Your camera’s sensor generates the “raw” image data that is then immediately converted to a jpg version (including various kinds of automatic post-processing) and the original raw data discarded.
Oddly, it often seems to me that camera jpg images are “super saturated” and quite often “super sharp.”
Another option is to shoot raw (e.g. retain the original sensor data) and do an automatic conversion in post. You could even tweak it and create presets that provide whatever general adjustments you think you prefer.
Nov 29, 2025 at 03:56 PM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #16938563 « What do you consider to be the purest form of digital image capture? »
