Cool thanks. will give them a miss and just use compressed as they are so close to uncompressed.
Don
-
-
Losslessly compressed files aren't much bigger than craw files, and can be smaller.
-
Thank you for your post. i was getting very tired of a certain member constantly saying my images were 3 stops under exposed when they were clearly not, just like you have demonstrated.
-
I haven't seen anyone in this thread say your image was 3 stops underexposed. Can you post a link to the post or copy/paste the sentence along with its author?
-
the problem was is that when the L lossy compressed files were processed via ACR they had less fine detail ,texture and tonal information than the compressed file, size was very similar though.
-
That sentence makes no sense to me. What's a L lossy compressed file? What's the other compressed file you're talking about?
-
Could you post a histogram for the whole frame, with a logarithmic Y-axis ?
I'll post something similar I've seen on Panasonic shortly.
-
Switching the y-axis to logarithmic certainly makes the data clearer visually. Yes, the clipping is clearer now. So really, I had only about 1/2 a stop of highlight headroom in the raw data reds and blues and no headroom in the greens in the original shot (_MG_1468) where the camera's histogram was beginning to show clipping.
-
Of course, extracting the encoded raw data and then processing that into a monochrome mosaic pattern is one early stage example of processing raw data into a viewable image. I could "extract" the encoded raw image data in other ways, with a text editor for example, but I wouldn't have a viewable image. A program which is capable of: extracting the encoded raw data, understanding what it represents, and processing (convert, transform, choose your word preference) the raw data into some type of recognizable image form is needed, if I want it to be viewable.
There are a number of steps contained in the raw processing pipeline to arrive at a full color (or monochrome) reconstruction of the recorded raw image data. The image can be viewed at various stages of processing. Thanks for sharing one example, which is a PNG file labeled as "raw" — but close enough for demonstration purposes. There are other examples at different stages which can be found elsewhere, such as in the PDF link I provided.
The posted "raw" image that I was referring to was essentially completely processed except for a few adjustments to white balance and tone to present a more normal appearance. It does open the door to the question of: just how raw is the raw image you see displayed when you're processing it in your favorite raw processing app?
-
sony has added 3 more raw compression formats LL LM LS for my a74. just did another test with 3 of them .uncompressed, L lossy compressed, compressed. and even at 3000 % with raw ,psd, jeg from raw i couldnt tell the images apart.
-
Neither does JPEG, or even TIFF.
-
Lossy compressed files are not even close to raw. It's either lossy, or raw.
Interesting that many were able to see the problems with lossy and forced Sony to add lossless compression.
-
tell that to sony
-
I don't talk to marketing.
-
Your program opens them so they must be raw and so does ACR
-
"RAW files are image files that contain uncompressed and unprocessed image data, allowing you to capture practically every detail seen from the camera image sensor." -- www.sony.com/electronics/support/articles/00024655
-
your program shows no flaws in them neither when it does in compressed ,can you explain this. i can post a link of a file if you like ?
-
That's pretty dumb logic because ACR also opens jpeg files, so if your logic applies to all situations then jpeg files must also be raw files.
