If you guys read my prior posts I was not saying that jpegs are the all to be all, nor was I saying that jpegs were as good as raw files at large sizes, but I am saying that there are times, even for the professional workflow, when a OOC files are more than appropriate... High quantity shooting, editorial, website only clients, small print clients, etc... Not everything needs to be RAW processed and for the quantity of shooting I can on occasion shoot, if I was to do raw processing for everything, i would be out of business a long time ago. Yes for large prints... for portfolio work... for times when you want to guarantee maximum quality or when you think you may be doing heavy post processing and want the best files to work with, yes, raw has it's place. The whole debate of the raw only or your amateur is silly but not respecting the raw ability is just as silly. Lastly, my comment regarding Roes systems, I know a lot of pro labs use roes systems, they only take jpegs... My point was if jpeg file formats were that inferior to tiff or psd, they, especially pro labs would demand you give them the tiff/psd... But in the end what quality jpeg and processing you had to do to get the file OOC jpeg/RAW in order to get the final result is all up to the photographer and his or her techniques and workflow to get there.