Under & Over-exposed images on Raw

[apophoto]

If my shots are 2 or 3 stops over or underexposed on raw files, would I expect to recover sufficient details unlike jpgs? When I shoot raw, how much deviation from the ideal exposure range do I have to get good-looking prints? I pose this question because matrix or evaluative metering can be way off the mark in tricky light sitution and I overlook to bracket my shots. Response appreciated.

[ShaolinTiger]

Well best is to nail the exposure.

Basically it boils down like this, it's better to underexpose than overexpose.

Even in RAW if you overexpose and blow the highlights, there is no detail captured on the sensor at all, so nothing to recover.

With highlights you have a small leeway, less than 1 stop.

With underexposed you can pull back the shot up to 2-3 stops, depending on shadow detail, you can totally lose that too.

But the image will because very noisy, that's the downside.

[newdaddy]

With underexposed you can pull back the shot up to 2-3 stops, depending on shadow detail, you can totally lose that too.

But the image will because very noisy, that's the downside.

oh that's what happened to my underxposed shots, though try to recover with photoshop on the RAW but still very noisy, worst still if I used high ISO like 800 or 1600 on my 400d.