>>3836619To explain it from software perspective, i think the biggest problem is postprocessing that's being done by camera, the smaller problem is amount of bits that every pixel describes itself with.
>postprocessingimagine you want to apply noise reduction on image. with raw file, it's straightforward: your raw data from sensor is being processed by one algorithm that takes a good look at all of your colorful pixels and applies math on it, blending them into less noisy set of pixels. But when you shoot jpeg, your camera already did that, and now your lightroom is applying second, different algorithm. Lightroom NR math is now a bit confused, it degrades detail further, and you have no means of getting some of original detail (that LR algorithm would be able to keep on photo) back because it was already masked-blurred by a previous algorithm. The result of NR running on your NR-ed photo is far less controllable and overall worse than the result of one algorithm taking input it was designed to take, and then outputting what it was designed to output
>bitsjpeg pixels are being saved in values 0-255 per color, and your sensor can pull out more percision in some situations. raw pixel is being saved in 0-16k-something, so imagine situation where your pixel in jpeg would be value 128, but in raw it's something like 128.15. As you process image, manipulating exposure or anything, this little difference can become massive.
if you want to do serious postprocessing on computer, shoot raw
