Just thought this could be a productive thing to discuss...
There seems to be a bit of confusion to what a RAW workflow implies, and there are defintely different ways of doing things that can get you where you want.
This is not inteneded to be an Adobe vs FCP/whatever discussion, but more about what can give which results and about the signalchain.
I'll post examples as the discussion hopefully evolves...
But what I'd like to ask first is for different definitions of "RAW" workflow.
To me it mainly means that you don't do a transcode. It says very little about image integrity, as that can be messed up in both a RAW and a non-RAW workflow.
There seems, though - to be a bit of misunderstanding about how the metadataparameters affect the signalchain, from the "well it's raw so I have everything available" statements... Which is only partilally true, as that is totally dependent on how you set your metadata.
And I thought it could be fun - and possibly a bit enlightening - to discuss these issues.
How does your metadata affect your image in a RAW workflow
How does that differ from a transcoded workflow
If one chooses to transcode, how and why would we do that for different scenarios.
Hope this is of some interest and that people can join in with examples.
I'd love examples posted to be in r3d single frames, and transcoded media of choice, not only jpg's, as that isn't very informative to the subject. If someone wants to post files, but don't have serverspace - I'll gladly host the files.
Just to be clear, what I want to discuss is different approaches to technical integrity of the image.
The aestethical values and choices, are just that. And cannot be measured in any way I know of.
I tend often to do rather harsh aesthetically choices... :)
Let the discussion begin!
I don't mind discussing different toolsets, I just don't want the standard Adobe vs the world discussion.