[derekkite]

Difficulty is a matter of perception. Enthusiasts/amateurs like us are passionate about imaging and we wanted to take the time to learn about post processing. After a while it become second nature. We developed some presets that get us 90% of the image we want and then we fine tune the rest of the way. As Clavius said, we adjust for lens effects like color distortion, dodging and burning to even out tones, etc. It's very easy, as you say, to get a few images done per minute. This process competes against the in-camera JPG engine where most people are 99% satisfactory with the instantaneous color/tonal result. The number one adjustment is cropping. Those users have a completely different software interface to make their image adjustments. There are a few tools, some pre-canned effects and they are good with that. I've shown people what Aperture and RawTherapee look like and they said it looks hard. Perception.

The vast majority of film shooters had someone else do the development.

I don't use jpegs because the things I shoot tend to need some tender loving care. I crop, the white balance is often off (less so with the K3) the exposure needs adjusting, some highlights need perking up. I can do many of these things in camera, but it is easier at a desktop with a large screen.

[IchabodCrane]

We imagine using iPhoto as a mini version of Aperture or Lightroom, which can be done to a certain degree, but the "average" user probably uses this package for pre-canned effects, cropping, and minor adjustments like brightness, contrast, etc. Something like a histogram is foreign and unnecessary to them. iPhoto also has a way of managing libraries and groups of pictures and such and I think a lot of people appreciate that. That's how I started using iPhoto a long time ago and that's why moving to Aperture was a natural progression for me.

I think we have to understand that we here on the forum have a very high standard of performance and quality. It's rare, and often misunderstood. Processing RAW is hard and it takes time. We make time because we enjoy the creative process. It's a large part of what makes the image and we love the image - from the moment we see it in our mind's eye to when it appears on the screen / in print. For others the image is just a small part of what could be a larger creative process. So for them, they look for the highest quality in-camera JPG engine available. Those happen to be found in cameras with big sensors. Big sensors have typically been found in big DSLR bodies. This is changing as small bodies get better and better but so are DSLR cameras. I have a feeling that thanks to Sony's recent MILC FF body we'll soon see FF being as common as APS-C is today. And hence, the race between small and large will continue. In the end, everyone will win since technology can only move one way : forward (generally).

The advantage of using iPhoto and RAW files is that even the default processing almost always ends up better than Pentax's default JPEG output. So even if the user does nothing other than simply import a RAW file (assuming the camera is supported), he/she likely ends up ahead of the game. Also, iPhoto is set by default to do this by just plugging the card into the card reader.

[6BQ5]

Don't forget too that people love posting pictures on social digital media. They look for the quickest path with the least work required. You can't post a RAW file on Facebook. Those sites scream for JPGs. The idea of RAW shooting is pretty far from most people's minds. Having to work a RAW file, even what we would consider minimally, is too much for most people. It's still the perception if difficulty.

A colleague asked me how big the file size is of my images. Specifically, how big are the JPGs. I explained that I shoot in RAW and make my own JPGs. He was very surprised since the camera is suppose to make JPGs for me (right? right?). His final comment was interesting: "Then after you make the JPG you can delete that file since you don't need it."

Maybe the perception of RAW files also comes from the days of film negatives. Many people didn't care about the negatives. How many stories have we heard about negatives being tossed? It was just a means of getting prints. And processing negatives is a huge heap of work to a lot of people. People were willing to pay money to not do it themselves. Hence, labs thrived in the past. Today's JPGs are yesterday's prints.

[gazonk]

To assume Apple owners use software bundled with the machine merely because it is bundled with the machine is a false assumption.

You're not a mac user, so you're making false assumptions about the way iPhoto is bundled on mac. But I really think it's time to end this sub-thread now.

[normhead]

You're not a mac user, so you're making false assumptions about the way iPhoto is bundled on mac. But I really think it's time to end this sub-thread now.

Can I have the last word?... I want the last word....

......... "word" ......

[kadajawi]

Don't forget too that people love posting pictures on social digital media. They look for the quickest path with the least work required. You can't post a RAW file on Facebook. Those sites scream for JPGs. The idea of RAW shooting is pretty far from most people's minds. Having to work a RAW file, even what we would consider minimally, is too much for most people. It's still the perception if difficulty.

I insert the memory card, start Lightroom. Let Lightroom import and rename the files, no need to do myself. Then I right click on the photo I want on facebook, select export to facebook. Select location and done. No need to bother with the website, no need to browse for the file on the hard disk. Using raw and Lightroom makes things easier. Now obviously many don't know that this can save them time AND give better results.

And yes, the processing in Lightroom is better than what any camera can do by itself. I've processed raw photos from my Canon superzoom (with hacked firmware), and I was surprised by how good the photos actually are. The internal engine totally destroyed them.

[RonHendriks1966]

I insert the memory card, start Lightroom. Let Lightroom import and rename the files, no need to do myself. Then I right click on the photo I want on facebook, select export to facebook. Select location and done. No need to bother with the website, no need to browse for the file on the hard disk. Using raw and Lightroom makes things easier. Now obviously many don't know that this can save them time AND give better results.

And yes, the processing in Lightroom is better than what any camera can do by itself. I've processed raw photos from my Canon superzoom (with hacked firmware), and I was surprised by how good the photos actually are. The internal engine totally destroyed them.

I have to look into this option. Did not know that.