Why Don't Camera's Have Raw Histograms?

About a stop underexposed form ETTR.

It helps even more when it's raw (lossless).

you really dont understand what this post is about do you ? yet comment and dont even know what the topic is.🥱

Really strange combing in that histogram.

no it doesnt.

now show us all the related histogram that a 8 bit monitor would display. and then another of a print printed with 10 colours.

You are comparing images of different resolutions.

Sure you can prove it, using that "best raw converter", as you call it.
Lossy raw is full of artifacts, look in RawDigger.
Not to mention this:

walking backwards are we.

Raw converter and image editor work from data, GIGO.

well post a full res converted raw then, is that to much to ask ? show everyone the artefacts viewed at 300% which is a 20 foot print.

I did, actually.
Do yourself a favour, learn to make proper A/B comparisons?

FRV says 0.3 of a stop

you posted the embedded jpeg from sony program. you may have well just reposted my jpeg.

thats what you entered into the competition and thats what was judged, you came 2nd 😁

I never used a "sony program" to post an embedded JPEG.
I used Sony IEDT to post a full raw conversion, a TIFF.
Sorry you can't concentrate.

"im not real smart but i can lift heavy fings" 😉i have no idea how to extract embedded files . can you do it in ACR ?

Is that a question? If so, and your persistent failure to use proper punctuation makes it a legitimate question here, then the answer is no. I'm holding you accountable for what you are writing in this thread, not some thread in a distant past. What's more, I'm bringing the discussion back to the original topic while you are trying to derail it with your silly argument over why we shouldn't need a Raw histogram because we don't really even need Raw files to begin with. You clearly have a tactic in your exchanges with me in this thread to divert attention away from your unsupportable positions, that being to ignore or otherwise not directly respond to replies that apparently embarrass you (e.g., the simple conversion I did of your parrot photo that I think showed clearly that the OOC JPEG was far from optimal, my comments about your curious choices for said parrot photo, and your failure here to address the question of ETTR as it relates to OOC JPEGs).