[Narretz]

> It just "happens" to be also available to select for the end-user after product-launch

RAW (any format) is an essential requirement for many photographers. You just can't get the same results out of a jpeg.

[rickdeckard]

None of this is disputed (or relevant) in this conversation

[mort96]

I disagree. Bufferoverflow frames raw formats as something that's really only there for R&D purposes, and it's more or less just an afterthought that it's available to photographers. In reality, Narretz points out, getting access to the raw sensor data is a key feature to many photographers; it's an essential aspect of the product from a user perspective.

[rickdeckard]

Since you disagree: where in this thread did anyone state the opposite of what you just wrote, who said that RAW is NOT a key feature to many photographers?

[mort96]

Here:

> It is supposed to be raw data from the sensor with some additional metrics streamed in, just sufficiently standardized to be used in the camera-vendors' toolchain for development. It just "happens" to be also available to select for the end-user after product-launch.

[rickdeckard]

Nothing here states that a RAW format is NOT a key feature to many photographers. This is a straw-man argument.

[mort96]

It says that it "just happens" to be available to customers and the main reason it exists is for R&D. That's what I disagree with.