In2Photos wrote in post #3200539
The RAW should give you more headroom for editing, but that depends on the shot. If you have a shot witha very small dynamic range and you got the exposure and WB dead on, then RAW will not give you any advantage. Those shots where you have more dynamic range or difficult WB the RAW will give you the lattitude to correct any issues.
I like your quote in your signature.
My comments:
There is a wonderful example in Martin Evening's book on Lightroom where two identical shots were taken, one RAW, the other JPEG.
On both, cloud highlites were slightly blown; cloud detail was recoverable in the RAW file, no detail could be recovered in the JPEG file.
I have taken many shots with the sky completely red in Lightroom (flashing black on the camera LCD). Not only have I gotten detail, I have recovered some blue sky.
Martin Evening goes on to say:
"The alternative option is to shoot using JPEG mode where the camera automatically applies the image processing. This can include things like setting the white balance, adjusting shadow and highlight clipping, applying a tone curve, removing noise, sharpening the image, converting the RAW file to an 8-bit RGB output space, and compressing the colour data (while trying to preserve the luminance) to produce a JPEG capture file. All the image processing is managed by an onboard processor inside the camera and the user has limited control over the JPEG processing beyond adjusting the white balance settings, sharpness, noise handling, and RGB colour space".
Because of this, I never shoot JPEG, and in all probability, never will.
One further comment: I've been using LR for three months every day for a couple of hours, and I'm still missing things - that's why I printed out the whole manual and bought Evening's book. In two days, I would have barely scratched the surface.