The JPG versus RAW debate….again


Just recently I read in one of the HDR Software User Manuals that it was better to use JPG rather than RAW for HDR processing. Especially if you are not intending to do any pre-processing i.e adjustments in ACR. Take a look at the image below, if you click on it you will be re-directed to the Flickr HDR Group where this is being discussed rather heatedly.

In explaining their statement the developers state (I added the italics to make the English flow a little better)

There is only a little gain in the usable dynamic range if you use multiple RAW files against multiple JPG files. This is because the different exposures overlap in a wider range than is the usable gain in RAW vs. JPG. Modern large sensor cameras will produce images with nearly 9 EV range dynamics. If we use three images from -2EV to +2EV we will get covered an area of 12-13 EV dynamic range which is a significant improvement over the single image. If we use RAW files we may push it to 14-15EV in absolute terms. But for a little extra dynamic gain we are trading in much higher noise which we have to deal with some other way. A de-noising on each step will effectively reduce the dynamic range similar to what we would get from JPG files, except it took much longer.

I have always used RAW but I don’t always do pre-processing before hand. If there is little to be gained from shooting RAW then it would make sense for me to switch to JPG. But somehow I can’t force myself to select that option in the cameras menu.

If anyone out there reads this I really would be interested to hear your thoughts……

About these ads