I’ve listened to many tech reviewers and photo editors saying that RAW images are better and have been intrigued by it. Also what are it’s merits and demerits?
In: Technology
raw images are uncompressed.
Compression removes a lot of detail, and some steps of that are lossy ( detail can not be recovered ) an example is chrominance downsampling, as chrominance is not perceived by the human eye, the detail is considered unnecessary and is removed so to reduce the size of the image. If a movie shot in RAW wasn’t compressed, it would be 100s of gb and would take 10s of DVD’s to watch.
Latest Answers