Quoted By:
How to rekt the entire thread:
1) Not every photo is a fucking fence in a field that doesn't move. For any photographer that shoots anything that doesn't stay still long enough for a noob to eventually get right, SHOOT RAW.
Everyone here implies I cannot shoot JPEG without blowing out highlights or shadows, which shows that your fallacies of logic are based on irrational hatred and not logic, as if I can take all these photos in RAW just fine, one must imply that I can shoot in JPEG. My entire premise is that if I can afford to drive a Panamera, why choose a fucking Camry?
I only limit myself further by making every photo a JPEG since the best camera on the market cannot truly encapsulate the dynamic range REAL LIFE offers.
JPEG Fine does NOT capture the extended scope of RAW, and to an artist, why should I settle for "good enough" when I want to be the best possible?
You're all a bunch of whiny faggots who think you know shit because you grew up on archaic film but I grew up on the Mavica floppy disk. Come at me. I understand digital photography way deeper than most of you film baby boomers who think your generation got shit right.
I can't actually provide an example because from the time I first learned how digital cameras worked, I realized unless I'm in the middle of a war zone with a bullshit uplink, there is no feasible reason to limit my ability to extract every detail in post by using RAW.
That's where you noobs all fail, and why no matter how much you hate me, I'm shooting Bugatti's and buying my own Porsche before 25 when you can only stick to street photos and whining about your 1:1 pixel views XD
ebin may may