"RAW files are image files that contain uncompressed and unprocessed image data, allowing you to capture practically every detail seen from the camera image sensor." -- www.sony.com/electronics/support/articles/00024655
Naturally. When those are displayed they generally are not claimed to be "raw" as opposed to processed images, as was the case in the post to which I replied which compared one image as "processed" to another image labeled as "raw".
Yeah, but those are indeed ”image” files. A RAW file is fundamentally different and that’s clearly the point (an important one) that some people are trying to make - that, unlike a jpeg, if an image from a raw file looks a particular way in your editor, it is the processing applied by the that editor that is primarily responsible. The RAW file itself really only represents a potential image to be. Seems like a distinction that shouldn’t just be swept under the rug.
Im excited the penny has dropped. but im sorry for all those that it hasnt yet , im going to leave you all in limbo until you can figure it out for yourself 😁😁
a lolly pop to the first person that can show how the histogram is related to the image i posted. in 1 sentence, and how they arrived at there conclusion.
i will drop a hint. open many images . mine was easy with opening only 2 . this one and the other one. and i didnt move the EV0 point.