Robert Peters
Veteran Member
compressed NEF is between 9 and 10 bits.
Please refer to Thom Hogan's ebook.
Bob Peters
Please refer to Thom Hogan's ebook.
Bob Peters
Reading mode:
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
RAW Format
- Thread starter Sensible Name
- Start date
Zippy DooDah
Senior Member
Interesting. Thanks for pointing me to Thom's site.
Compression shouldn't change color depth at all, but apparently, if Thom is correct, Nikon does change it. Not sure how Nikon can legally claim to be 12-bit color depth if Thom is correct. Companies like HP have been sued (and HP lost!) over similar claims, so I'm very surprised to read this.
Thanks for the clarification.
Compression shouldn't change color depth at all, but apparently, if Thom is correct, Nikon does change it. Not sure how Nikon can legally claim to be 12-bit color depth if Thom is correct. Companies like HP have been sued (and HP lost!) over similar claims, so I'm very surprised to read this.
Thanks for the clarification.
Robert Peters wrote:
compressed NEF is between 9 and 10 bits.
Please refer to Thom Hogan's ebook.
Bob Peters
Sensible Name wrote:
The sensor in the D70 can capture 12-bit of data. When that RAW
data is compressed in the camera, only about 9 or 10 bit are in the
NEF file (some people have reverse-engineered D70 NEF files and
said so in this forum). That's the reason for the small size (for
me this is small) of the NEF. NEF from the D70 is not exactly
lossless. And I like it a lot because I don't think my eyes are
keen enough to tell the difference any way.
fjp
Veteran Member
Well, version 4 or 5 wasn't addressing itself to photographers nearly as explicitly as CS, let alone NC or CR.I don't think I really understand the RAW format. For example. Do I
really need to correct white balance problem with Nikon Capture or
Nikon View Editor or Photoshop Camera RAW plug-in? I have been
using Photoshop since version 4 or 5 to correct white balance of
all types of images long before I heard any thing about the
existence of RAW files.
More pointed tools were simply not available in PS in those earlier versions. You used the tools that were available, and probably got very skilled in doing so. Now we have tools more specifically designed to help photographers solve the problems in terms THEY understand.Have I been doing something wrong over the
years?
It seems to me that the value of working with NEF is that you have tools in NC or CR that specifically address white balance. Sure you can do it with PS curves (or even NC curves!), or any number of other tools in PS, but is it as easy going that route these days as using a tool that specifically addresses the problem of adjusting the temperature of light?
Regarding Auto in the camera, I gave up using that setting after the first week of using the D70. My experience showed me that it was further off most of the time than if I chose a more specific white balance. The fact is, none of the options are dead on for most real situations, which contain lighting intermediate between the settings. (This is why you can "fine tune" each setting in the camera. But who's that good at judging color temperature that accurately in the field?) But the closer I am at guessing the lighting conditions in the field, the easier it is for me to correct for it later. Sometimes the in-camera Auto setting was so far off the mark I had difficulty judging where I should start, once I got into post-processing. But this is just a matter of experience, judgment, and concentration, and I'm getting better at it.
So explicitly setting white balance in the camera just makes it quicker to refine the white balance in NC or CR. Doing this refinement in NC or CR rather than PS proper is just using a photographer's tool to do a photographer's job.
I read this whole thread and I think bringing up the issue of JPG only confused the central issue, of whether you can correct white balance after you've converted a file from NEF. Say you converted to TIFF, which is what I do. You're still faced with the same "problems" I mentioned above.I also even have heard some people saying that if you shoot in JPG
mode, you cannot correct for white balance later because they said
white balance can be corrected only from RAW files. I don't think
this is true.
In my opinion (and in the opinion of people I respect) with a proper workflow, you should never have to correct an image once it is converted to JPEG. If you inherit a JPEG from some other source, that's a different story. But if the entire workflow is under your control, there is no justification for post-processing JPEG images except carelessness on your part: you screwed up the original data and then threw it away and now the only thing you have to work with is JPEG.
I'm not sure that what you said was wrong. It just wasn't up to date. Our tools are continuallly being refined and rendered more pointed. Especially for people just starting out, they should learn to use the latest and greatest tools to solve their problems. For the old veterans, often it's more efficient for them to continue using what they're used to rather than learn a bunch of new stuff.Please help me to make this clear.
--
FJP
Robert Peters
Veteran Member
saying that compressed NEF is "visually lossless".
Bob Peters
Bob Peters
Compression shouldn't change color depth at all, but apparently,
if Thom is correct, Nikon does change it. Not sure how Nikon can
legally claim to be 12-bit color depth if Thom is correct.
Companies like HP have been sued (and HP lost!) over similar
claims, so I'm very surprised to read this.
Thanks for the clarification.
Robert Peters wrote:
compressed NEF is between 9 and 10 bits.
Please refer to Thom Hogan's ebook.
Bob Peters
Sensible Name wrote:
The sensor in the D70 can capture 12-bit of data. When that RAW
data is compressed in the camera, only about 9 or 10 bit are in the
NEF file (some people have reverse-engineered D70 NEF files and
said so in this forum). That's the reason for the small size (for
me this is small) of the NEF. NEF from the D70 is not exactly
lossless. And I like it a lot because I don't think my eyes are
keen enough to tell the difference any way.
baltimorebiker
Leading Member
so let me get this straight .......................
what you are saying is do all of the changes you need to in nef form first . and then .....save as ..................a tiff or jpeg , keeping your raw or nef file as a hardcopy original or for lack of a better word the negative .
is this correct ?
thanks
and 1 more thing when i try and burn nef files to a cd nero has a problem with it and i dont know why .
what you are saying is do all of the changes you need to in nef form first . and then .....save as ..................a tiff or jpeg , keeping your raw or nef file as a hardcopy original or for lack of a better word the negative .
is this correct ?
thanks
and 1 more thing when i try and burn nef files to a cd nero has a problem with it and i dont know why .
fjp
Veteran Member
I am absolutely not saying this. I am saying, use the right tool for the right job. I do minimal post-processing in NC, only the stuff that it is really good at doing. (I tried, but do not use CR, but the same argument holds.) For me that is white balance and exposure. I found you may have to iterate back and forth between these two, to "get it right."so let me get this straight .......................
what you are saying is do all of the changes you need to in nef
form first .
I'm sometimes tempted to use the curves and levels in NC, but PS is really much better at doing those things. It almost goes without saying, but the other thing that NC is good at is reading NEF files and putting them into a lossless format on disk that PS can understand. For me that is TIFF (some folks wiser than I suggest I should save to the native PS format, but that's something I haven't gotten around to dealing with yet; old dogs, you know -- the very thing I was preaching against).
No, to the statement as a whole. I save to TIFF from NC, never to JPEG, because by the time I'm ready to leave NC, I'm not yet ready to commit to final adjustments. You only save to JPEG when you're done with everything, including sharpening as the very last step.and then .....save as ..................a tiff or jpeg
Not quite. I do archive the NEF file, since it contains the original data. But I also archive my (almost) final adjustments in a TIFF file. But the TIFF file is not sharpened. After saving to TIFF in PS, I resample the image down for display on my monitor and on the WEB and I save those resampled versions in sharpened JPEGs. Later, if I decide that the JPEG images aren't as good as they could be, I simply throw them out, go back to the TIFF and improve my adjustments. Sometimes I go all the way back to the NEF and start from scratch., keeping your raw or nef file as a hardcopy original or for lack
of a better word the negative .
is this correct ?
I haven't had that problem. I've had problems where it incorrectly writes even little JPEG files, but I've recently upgraded my burner to the latest Sony double-layer burner. I hope I have better luck. The new machine is also an order of magnitude faster so I'm hoping my former slow machine had something to do with the failures I was getting.thanks
and 1 more thing when i try and burn nef files to a cd nero has a
problem with it and i dont know why .
Another problem I was having with JPEGs when I was building my new machine is I was getting (wired) network failures copying my JPEG directory tree from my old machine to my new machine. What I had to do was take my firewire drive off the old machine and connect it to my new machine and copy the files directly. I don't know what there is about JPEG files. All it is from the standpoint of information theory is completely random data (i.e. containing the greatest amount of information). Maybe that's the problem.
--
FJP
baltimorebiker
Leading Member
Not quite. I do archive the NEF file, since it contains the original data. But I also archive my (almost) final adjustments in a TIFF file. But the TIFF file is not sharpened. After saving to TIFF in PS, I resample the image down for display on my monitor and on the WEB and I save those resampled versions in sharpened JPEGs. Later, if I decide that the JPEG images aren't as good as they could be, I simply throw them out, go back to the TIFF and improve my adjustments. Sometimes I go all the way back to the NEF and start from scratch.
this was more what i was looking for !
hey thank you so much for your help ............
i really need to sit down with someone or maybe ask a few questions over the phone i am getting this but there is just so much to learn it can be overwhelming sometimes .
but once again thank you so much for your help .
this was more what i was looking for !
hey thank you so much for your help ............
i really need to sit down with someone or maybe ask a few questions over the phone i am getting this but there is just so much to learn it can be overwhelming sometimes .
but once again thank you so much for your help .
baltimorebiker
Leading Member
hey check your email i just sent you one
Iliah Borg
Forum Pro
Well, it has. It calculates the ratio between red, green, and blue; and stores that ration in NEF file, or applies to JPEG file. The errors are mainly due to integration of the light reflected from the whole scene. Custom balance from grey card or Expodisk are more accurate in many situations.I don't think the D70 has a colorimeter too --
Additionally some presets include special processing.
Yes, we need to correct, due to errors; and/or edit due to the desired look of the image.that's why we have to CORRECT.
--
no text
Iliah Borg
Forum Pro
NONE is about 7000KFor my D70, I set the white balance to AUTO (and I will never
change that for the life of this camera), just because it does not
provide a "NONE" setting.
--
no text
Sensible Name
Active member
Thanks for the information. I might not have used the right word, in fact, I don't really know what a colorimeter is. I thought the D70 does not have a meter that can measure the color temperature of the scene, that's what I meant. Did you mean to say that the D70 can measure the color temperature? (I mean hardware not software).Well, it has. It calculates the ratio between red, green, and blue;
Sensible Name
Active member
That's one reason I only shoot in RAW format. I set white balance to AUTO because I can't see any setting better than this. I simply cannot go into the menu and change the white balance very often. That's the old habit I got from decades of using film. For me, it's not practical to change this setting in real life. We can deal with it later in the darkroom (real darkroom or currently the digital darkroom, Photoshop software or Nikon Capture, etc).My understanding is for RAW, the the camera's WB setting has no
effect on the RAW's data, but is only used as a default when
importing the RAW file.
Sensible Name
Active member
Did you mean the D70 has a NONE setting for white balance? If that is the case, why NONE is 7000K. In my opinion, NONE should be NONE (which means "I don't care").NONE is about 7000K
Sensible Name
Active member
Now, you make it more clear, Thanks for the clever use of words, APPLY, RE-APPLY and CORRECT. People who don't understand the issue should have read your comment, so the myth will go away.I think people who "understand that white balance can be corrected
only from RAW files" actually refer to the the fact that it's
possible to RE-APPLY correct WB setting to NEF and get perfect
picture while it would be very hard to recover JPG made with
critically wrong white balance.
Sensible Name
Active member
The name of the software is "Photoshop" already (and before that "Aldus Photo Styler"?). In those days, most photographers still use film and computers are not powerful enough. You're right.Well, version 4 or 5 wasn't addressing itself to photographers
Yes, and I have been taking photographs and working in the dark room (I'm only a hobbyist and I'm sure I'm not good at it) for decades but never heard the words "white balance" before. I recently realized that it's the same thing I have been doing - maybe with different words but same concept.but is it as easy going that route these days as
using a tool that specifically addresses the problem of adjusting
the temperature of light?
I understand but for me, this process is too much time-consuming and it's likely that I would forget most of the time. Old habits die hard!Regarding Auto in the camera, I gave up using that setting after
the first week of using the D70. My experience showed me that it
was further off most of the time than if I chose a more specific
white balance.
I totally agree and you are a bridge for two generations that look for the same thing but with different terms and tools.But this is just a matter of experience, judgment, and concentration
Sensible Name
Active member
That's also almost exactly what I do. I created the TIF files but I just do not keep all the TIF files because 16-bit compressed unsharpened TIF is still large for me (each is about 34 megabytes and I keep all of them in DVDs) (Maybe, I change my mind and follow you). I only archive unsharpened TIF when I think that I cannot reproduce it easily later in Photoshop such as cloning out some spots of dust or imperfections or when I had to use a lot of Photoshop tools to get to the colors that I want. In many cases, correct white balance is only the preliminary step and is not enough. Thanks.Not quite. I do archive the NEF file, since it contains the
original data. But I also archive my (almost) final adjustments in
a TIFF file. But the TIFF file is not sharpened. After saving to
TIFF in PS, I resample the image down for display on my monitor and
on the WEB and I save those resampled versions in sharpened JPEGs.
Later, if I decide that the JPEG images aren't as good as they
could be, I simply throw them out, go back to the TIFF and improve
my adjustments. Sometimes I go all the way back to the NEF and
start from scratch.
Iliah Borg
Forum Pro
There is no explicit NONE setting. But native colour temperature of the sensor colour space seem to be about 7000K.NONE is about 7000K
--
no text
Iliah Borg
Forum Pro
Yes, there is a circuit in D70 which measures colour temperature. Firmware is involved in processing the readings to get the coefficients. same as in hand-held colormeters.Thanks for the information. I might not have used the right word,Well, it has. It calculates the ratio between red, green, and blue;
in fact, I don't really know what a colorimeter is. I thought the
D70 does not have a meter that can measure the color temperature of
the scene, that's what I meant. Did you mean to say that the D70
can measure the color temperature? (I mean hardware not software)
--
no text
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.