Good Morning, Xavier!
I suspect you are being a wee bit too cynical. The key to Reuter's new policy
is, I think, in the final line of the Petapixel article.
"RAW photos do allow for a greater degree of post-processing flexibility, so
based on the new policy, it appears that Reuters found that photos processed
from RAWs are more likely to distort the truth."
In an age where the old expression "The camera doesn't lie" is is under fire
because of Photoshop, Gimp and similar post-processing software, it is one way
for Reuters (and others) to ensure the accuracy of the images they distribute.
Not a bad idea, I'd say!
David.
Good Day Flexers,
I've harvested this from Fuji Rumors:
http://petapixel.com/2015/11/18/reuters-issues-a-worldwide-ban-on-raw-photos/
Me think that the size of Raw probably puts off the journalists.(or what ever
the Bas....ds call themselves...)
Beside the Raw is not universal enough, you need a tool to read it, if you
are under UNIX religion, it performs not too good, if you are under MAC .
Windoze, you need to invest in licences of Photoshop.
Not to mention 'be the first' to spread the butter over the media (Under)
educated viewers.
We have seen it in Paris lately, all the 'news tubes' trying to
plus-plus-plussing till it was sick to switch on the telly or radio.
Sorry for my anarchism......
#-----------------------------------
From : Xavier F. BILLE
mail : hot_billexf@xxxxxxxxxxx
Maisons Alfort - France
