Re: Raw v. Tiff
- From: "\(not quite so\) Fat Sam" <samandjanet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 20:36:20 +0100
dorayme wrote:
In article <yhq_j.2031$jI5.1926@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Bruce." <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"dorayme" <doraymeRidThis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:doraymeRidThis-536ACA.11420226052008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Someone had a Nikon digital at a function I attended yesterday. Very
nice and all, I notice it had a "Raw" format as well as "Tiff".
What is the advantage of Raw over Tiff? (I know two disadvantages,
not all computers can read Raw but most can read Tiff. And Raw is
even bigger in file size to Tiff.)
One big huge difference is that tiff is a standard, while raw is
not. Nikon raw files are not compatible with Canon raw files, etc..
So anyone wanting to read a Nikon raw file needs a compatable
display program. Unless your friend also has a Nikon camera, you
would never email a raw file (also because they are huge).
Yes, the man with the camera did complain about that, he wanted to
dump raw onto the computer of someone at the function I referred to
above. But could not without the proprietory software. I suggested he
carry the software on a flash stick for when he travels.
Tiff, on the other hand, is a standard, and is also lossless like
raw.
The other difference is that raw is a raw dump of the sensor with no
processing at all, hence the name raw. So as you move them to your
PC, they need to be processed for color balance, etc., while tiffs
are stored preprocessed.
Generally you would create raw files with your camera and then
transfer those to your computer and save them as Photoshop psd
files. From there you could create tiff files if needed, or even
the much smaller (but lossy) jpegs.
Sounds sensible. Depends on how fussy one wants to be I guess. Perhaps
you are implying that if the camera produces a high quality Tiff, it
still has made irreversible or difficult-to-reverse decisions and
that a skilled digital photographer will generally do better with raw
and making various decisions.
Perhaps for most people Tiff will be fine.
You've pretty much got the jist of it.
But don't write off TIFF or Jpeg mode completely.
There are still some applications where RAW just isn't suitable as it's not
fast enough, and even professional photographers still use Jpeg to get the
fast write time.
Sports photography is a classic example.
Sports photographers have to catch as many shots of a fleeting piece of
action in a short burst, so they use Jpeg mode as that allows them to write
far more frames per second to the memory card than RAW mode allows.
That's also why most sports photographers tend to use Canon DSLR's, as they
generally have the fastest burst shooting mode. That's the most frames
writen to the memory card per second.
The trade off is, as always, quality against speed.
.
- References:
- Raw v. Tiff
- From: dorayme
- Re: Raw v. Tiff
- From: Bruce.
- Re: Raw v. Tiff
- From: dorayme
- Raw v. Tiff
- Prev by Date: Re: Raw v. Tiff
- Next by Date: Re: Raw v. Tiff
- Previous by thread: Re: Raw v. Tiff
- Next by thread: Re: Raw v. Tiff
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
