Shooting RAW

I have been shooting with a digital camera (or two, or three--forgot about the lab 1Mp HP camera) for five years now. Only two months ago did I start shooting in the RAW format seriously. The reason? I was too lazy to read the user manual. RAW format requires post-shooting processing. I had to learn the software. It takes quite some computational time. And the files are at least two to three times bigger. Thus before I invested enough money in CF cards, I was quite satisfied with my JPEG images, until I saw the result of processed RAW images.

RAW is also called "the digital negative". I know the flexibilities of negatives. I have fond memories of printing from negatives (will write about that later). A RAW file is uncompressed, containing all the information the camera took at the time of picture taking. There are many parameters that you can change when you process a RAW file, such as white balance, contrast, exposure, color tone, etc. That was my knowledge of RAW.

Today I read some technical articles on RAW. Though technical, they were still written for a layman such as me. I found them very informative. If you are interested, here are the links:

Ron Bigelow's articles on RAW: Part I, Part II, Part III.

The following is my 3-point summary of why we should shoot RAW:

1. Digital camera sensors are linear devices. They only have a dynamic range of 5 to 6 stops. Highlights to mid-tones occupy most of the dynamic range (>75%). (See Table I in Part I)
2. Human eyes are non-linear devices. Our eyes are more sensitive to shadows than highlights.
3. JPEG is stored in 8-bit, RAW in 12-bit. Thus RAW conserves more information of shadow areas that appeal to human eyes.
   

OK, from now on I am going to shoot RAW only.