Oh, what is raw?

Raw (Nikon NEF or Fuji RAF) is the file type I shoot. I shoot raw because it allows me the most latitude to process and edit the image to create a quality finished photo.

[deleted]

Output from Adobe's Denoise DNG (4 channels in DNG per RawDigger). It seems to be a Linear Raw with a Color Filter Array.
$ exiftool -H -S -G -a -ee -PhotometricInterpretation /Volumes/Photo/2023/2023-08-05/L1000042-Enhanced-NR.dng
[EXIF] 0x0106 PhotometricInterpretation: RGB
[EXIF] 0x0106 PhotometricInterpretation: Color Filter Array
[EXIF] 0x0106 PhotometricInterpretation: Linear Raw
[EXIF] 0x0106 PhotometricInterpretation: YCbCr
[EXIF] 0x0106 PhotometricInterpretation: Linear Raw
[EXIF] 0x0106 PhotometricInterpretation: Linear Raw
[EXIF] 0x0106 PhotometricInterpretation: Linear Raw

I think there is also the software to consider, you can get quite different results opening raw files in various software .

I think it is "raw" as I don't think it is an acronym like say ISO { International Standards Organization } and does not need capitalisation . On the other hand maybe raw stands for something I am ignorant of { always a possibility 😀 }

That’s pretty much the point of having all those options.

blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/roles-of-camera-and-raw-developer-in-determining-color/

There are so many alternatives around it is hard to pin down which works best for me. I have tried a lot but in the end I tend to stick with adobe not necessarily because it is the "best" . I have just used adobe products for so long I feel at home with them. I quite like DXO's results but actively dislike the interface , it often does a better job with UWA lenses than the makers defaults sneaking in a slightly wider field of view, every mm counts for us UWA fans 😀

me too, i use it for the great features and most important for my mass shoots, actions.

Yes. Could you please upload such a DNG to a file exchange server (some of the free ones are Dropbox, Google Drive, WeTransfer) and e-mail a link to support@rawdigger.com ?

I'm making a difference here, technical term is raw, marketing invented "RAW" ;)

There is no best. There may be a best for you. Trying to assign a universal scalar metric to programs like this is fruitless.

Done.

Thank you.
This file packs together various types of (pseudo-)raw, four are linear (demosaicked), and one is mosaicked.

Please have a look at RawDigger Preferences -> Data Processing -> Vendor specific -> "DNG files" section (at the bottom). In the "DNG opcodes" drop-down you should have "Stage 1" selected; in "Additional image types" - "Enhanced image" (that corresponds to Adobe Camera RAW/Lightroom: Enhance image, as the RawDigger manual notes).

Now you should be able to use the bottom bar of the main RawDigger window to select "Frame:", number two is that linear (demosaicked) image.

Adobe define photometric interpretation in their DNG SDK, and the specification leaves no doubts what linear is:

Thank you for the analysis.
The important feature is that the channels are separate so that highlight recovery/reconstruction is still possible when one channel is clipped.

But not in the linear sections ;)

It is a conundrum many try to solve, but then find out it comes down to what suits them the most.

I agree despite having a wee dabble at every software offering that pops up I invariably end up using PS . I am very familiar with the interface and really there is little you cannot do in PS . Though I do like DXO pureraw for NR and their lens profiles are often better than ACR using the makers own

A quick example using a DPreview 14-30mm F/4 , the shot is taken at F/4 and 14mm , the DXO conversion is a touch wider and a touch sharper with no extra work

www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/4872758394/nikon-z-14-30mm-f4-s-real-world-samples/8739556640

Starting post-processing with a sharper version is not a good thing.
I don't like that DxO is making a wider image than I intended. I try to make the corners right when framing. At some point, DxO was even changing the ratio of the image, but I can turn that off now.