low resolution or compression?

[omid]

Hi
I guess this question is general, although I will be using Finepix S7000 in this case. I am wondering if as far as QUALITY is concerned, is it better to take RAW images at 6 MP and then use software compression to make the images a bit more manageable (say 1-2 MB) or direcly to take the pictures in a lower resolution (at RAW setting) to yield a 1-2MB picture without subsequent compression? I have just bought my S7000 and was quite disappointed (I still have to read the manual thouroughly) at the pictures taken at night with room lighting and the built in flash (hairs seems silvery). These were taken at 6MP, but the image size in the XD card is only 1.5 MB, meaning an internal hardware compression is taking place yielding these dodgy pictures. Tnx.

[radugrozes]

In the event you did't cleared your confusion yet, I have a small article at www.radugrozescu.com/photo-tech/raw-vs-jpeg.html about those matters.

The essence is that RAW are the very best option for extensive post processing because apart from the ISO setting you can modify almost any other setting: WB, tone, contrast, saturation, exposure.

So apart from severe errors of the exposure you can make any image look right.

It is the same as shooting negative film, where you have an additional stage to help you get the image right (the lab then, now the post processing).

Shooting jpegs is almost as shooting slides in the past, you have to get it right from the beginning, since the jpegs can tolerate only low to moderate post processing.