Beyond the obvious

Intimate portrait of an orchid (jpeg cropped). Exif data . For years the jpeg v raw debate has raged. Advocates of both formats defended their positions and ‘wars’ were waged in internet forums. A Google search will bring up thousands of hits on the topic and you’re welcome to wade through all of it but if you’re short on time, here’s a quick summary. Proponents of shooting jpegs say: The files are smaller and don’t clog up your hard disk. The quality is just as good as RAW or so close it doesn't make a difference in the real world. Saves time as there is no RAW post processing to be done. Proponents of RAW say: RAW gives you all the options to tweak your images to your heart’s content, while jpegs lock you into the processing decisions programmed in by your camera manufacturer. You can easily correct white balance mistakes. You can retrieve more detail, particularly out of highlights. The quality of the final image is superior to a straight jpeg. ...

Professional photography is competitive. If you ask a lot of professional photographers about their job they seem to have a love/hate relationship. They will often tell young photography students that photojournalism is dead, the profession as a photographer will not exist in a few years time because stills will be extracted from videos and you'll not be able to make a living as a professional photographer because everyone who has a digital camera these days thinks they're a gifted photographer. The same kind of thing has been said to creatives in all media for centuries. When photography first appeared on the scene, many said that painting was dead. But painters reinvented their art with surrealism, cubism and abstract painting, and now for many years there's even been a movement of artists who paint in a style of realism that mimics photography. The perception that excellent photography is important has been eroded from publishing, with ever lower professional fees, acce...