Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 69

Thread: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like

    Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    I downloaded and updated the firmware in my A7R2 to version 2.0.
    Sony, based on reading I've done on various fora apparently sacrifices some highlight granularity when doing raw file compression while protecting shadow granularity.

    I want to have details in highlights, clouds for example, while also maintaining detail in shadows.

    There have been observations by others that for "normal" shooting they don't see a difference. I decided to check for myself.

    I selected a test scene that included clouds and foliage in deep shade. The scene was backlight by a mid-morning sun through thin scattered clouds.

    Here's what I found:
    The uncompressed detail is on the left, and compressed is on the right in all the comparisons

    This first image was selected as proper exposure for the scene even though its -2EV from the 0 point on the meter. Its the best exposure for details in the clouds with highlight slider at -75, exposure 0, shadows +100 and no noise reduction.

    Name:  HIGHLIGHTS-1.jpg
Views: 1654
Size:  82.9 KB

    This comparison is the shadow area of the same images

    Name:  SHADOWS-1.jpg
Views: 1967
Size:  396.7 KB

    This comparison is the highlight area of an exposure that is pushed 3 EV with the exposure slider. Other settings are the same. Noise reduction is set to 50 for both luminance and color.

    Name:  HIGHLIGHTS-2.jpg
Views: 1659
Size:  91.9 KB

    This is the shadow area of the pushed image.

    Name:  SHADOWS-2.jpg
Views: 1754
Size:  427.8 KB

    To my eye looking at the 100% detail, the uncompressed file has more detail at both ends of the tonal curve. That's good news.
    Its subtle, but there. And, less noise in the shadows in the pushed image.
    David

    dmwfotos | davidmward.photography
    Thanks 8 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 8 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Many thanks David. Great stuff. That's the extra flexibility I was hoping for.
    With best regards, K-H.

  3. #3
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Looks like we picked up more data which makes sense. Happy now for C1 Im not so happy. Where is my update
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Looks like we picked up more data which makes sense. Happy now for C1 Im not so happy. Where is my update
    Be patient Guy it could be worse!!!! We could be stuck only with Adobe ..........

    If that was my only option I would sell all my cameras and take up golf!!!!!!!

  5. #5
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim DE View Post
    Be patient Guy it could be worse!!!! We could be stuck only with Adobe ..........

    If that was my only option I would sell all my cameras and take up golf!!!!!!!
    Im right there with you.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #6
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim DE View Post
    If that was my only option I would sell all my cameras and take up golf!!!!!!!
    Hey, they’re not mutually exclusive - when I’m not shooting I’m usually on a golf course playing.
    wayne
    My gallery
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Yup, C1 update, where are you? What takes you so long?

    Iridient works just fine. It's cheap and easy to learn.
    With best regards, K-H.

  8. #8
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    My guess tomorrow when the show actually opens in NY. My bet we will hear about lenses. I have my finger button on hold to see what lenses. I need longer than 85. I'm hoping
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Fox View Post
    Hey, they’re not mutually exclusive - when I’m not shooting I’m usually on a golf course playing.

    When I'm not photographing something I am riding my motorcycle, busting clay birds, fly fishing the surf, or sitting in a tavern with friends eating wings and drinking beer during a Flyer's game. If I wanted to spend 5.5 hours in a state of aggravation I would just sit at home and talk with the wife (Or call Adobe Customer Service and talk to these non-english speaking bozo's) and save the green and cart fees.....

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim DE View Post
    Be patient Guy it could be worse!!!! We could be stuck only with Adobe ..........

    If that was my only option I would sell all my cameras and take up golf!!!!!!!
    I know you've had issues with Adobe, but uncompressed RAW was supported from day one.

  11. #11
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Waiting can be healthy. Lol
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by dandrewk View Post
    I know you've had issues with Adobe, but uncompressed RAW was supported from day one.
    Not on my stand alone LR6 ... Then I upgraded to 2.2 and Now it can't even see a jpg file..... I am sooo done and will uninstall this LR6 when I get some free time at home. I'll keep my stand alone CS6 till it no longer works and then I will uninstall it as well and be totally Adobe free for the rest of my life.

    I don't use either of these enough to even make them worth the price or time to upgrade.... Plus I like the initial results better with all the other conversion softwares better anyway... I won't miss a thing uninstalling Adobe software


    And as you know concerning me and this uncompressed option not being able to see it now or forever really would not bother me either

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim DE View Post
    Not on my stand alone LR6 ... Then I upgraded to 2.2 and Now it can't even see a jpg file..... I am sooo done and will uninstall this LR6 when I get some free time at home. I'll keep my stand alone CS6 till it no longer works and then I will uninstall it as well and be totally Adobe free for the rest of my life.

    I don't use either of these enough to even make them worth the price or time to upgrade.... Plus I like the initial results better with all the other conversion softwares better anyway... I won't miss a thing uninstalling Adobe software
    Understood. FWIW, I have the stand alone LR6 as well, and haven't experienced any issues.

    You might consider the free trial for DxO Optics Pro 10. IMHO, the best RAW processor, best noise reduction, and the interface is far more intuitive and less invasive than C1. It also has plugins for Adobe so images can flow back and forth without leaving the application.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by dandrewk View Post
    Understood. FWIW, I have the stand alone LR6 as well, and haven't experienced any issues.

    You might consider the free trial for DxO Optics Pro 10. IMHO, the best RAW processor, best noise reduction, and the interface is far more intuitive and less invasive than C1. It also has plugins for Adobe so images can flow back and forth without leaving the application.


    I have had DXO for quite awhile as well as a handful of other conversion softwares.... Aperture for me has always worked well and with Topaz plugins does everything I need. I do agree that DXO op has by far the best noise rediction software available and was used often by me when I shot that noise monster a77 above 400 ISO. This a7rII has fantastic high ISO performance which for me negates the need to ever use prime on its files.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    I am having trouble understanding why a thread that compares compressed to uncompressed Sony A7RII raw files has turned into yet another harangue against Adobe software.

    There are several competent raw processing software options. None are perfect. Each has its attributes.

    I use Lightroom because I started with it during version 1 and have developed a workflow that works for me and an understanding about how it works that makes processing images quick and repeatable for me.

    I've used others, most notably Capture One several years ago with I was editing jobs with a colleague who had chosen C1 as his preferred processing software. Based on that experience I know it works. I never got comfortable with it and it never showed me capabilities that made me want to use it rather than Lightroom.

    I have the version of Capture that is offered by Sony for the A7RII. I suppose I could convert the test images to DNG and do the same comparison using Capture 1.

    It would take me quite a bit longer to accomplish because I have no idea what parameters to use.

    And, when I finished the thread would probably be overwhelmed with posts telling me what I did wrong.
    David

    dmwfotos | davidmward.photography
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    My fault David... I apologize......... I just can't get my copy of Lightroom to open a uncompressed RAW file from my a7rII and refuse to ever deal with Adobe's Customer Service Dept again to get this issue fixed as I would rather trash the Software. Which I have just done a bit ago... I am LR free now and you will hear no more issues about it from me.

    I do aplogize for taking your thread down a rabbit trail... I will bow out of this one until one of my other softwares are able to read one of these files

  17. #17
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,607
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    David, My take from this thread is that there was nothing wrong with LR. The problems with Sony lossy compressions were wrongly blamed on LR (and briefly made a case for C1 as something magical).

    Thanks for starting it and showing the examples.

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Well, I have used LR and PS quite a bit for DNG, NEF, ORF and ARW files.
    When I first tried LR or C1 some time ago I didn't get along with either.
    Then I tried again and have been comfortable with using both.

    What finally let me to prefer C1 was that I could get better, more subtle results with it. It's just me. I am sure we now can benefit from 14 bit raw regardless of which editor we use.
    With best regards, K-H.

  19. #19
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    David, My take from this thread is that there was nothing wrong with LR. The problems with Sony lossy compressions were wrongly blamed on LR (and briefly made a case for C1 as something magical).

    Thanks for starting it and showing the examples.
    That's not exactly true. Orange peel effect was never in C1 and no one I saw took the effort to even try C1 on some of those star effect shots. There are others but I'm not going to even try to remember them. I said nothing wrong about LR in this thread all I said was I'm waiting on C1. It's my preferred software and my opinion is it's better as it always has been. I'm not here to prove it , convert anyone or even take the time to test it over and over again either. I've been using C1 for at least 10 years, maybe longer. If I need to I'll shot compressed until C1 is updated which should be tomorrow anyway. Photo plus actually starts tomorrow on the show floor. But besides all this crap which I consider over now I just want to hear what lenses Sony is coming out with. I have a open lens spot in my bag and I want to fill it. Lol

    I'm a lens whore and I can't be going around with a open hole in my bag. It must be filled.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    "Orange peel effect was never in C1"

    http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/559...ht=orange+peel
    With best regards, K-H.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim DE View Post
    ... I just can't get my copy of Lightroom to open a uncompressed RAW file from my a7rII ...
    Not being able to open the raw files is probably because your version of LR did not support a recent enough version of the ACR engine. One thing Adobe does is update camera support in point releases of the ACR engine. They then have life cycle limits on the version of Lightroom or Photoshop the point versions support.

    Not sure how Capture One does the camera updates.

    Since I use the Adobe products everyday and keep them up-to-date their update methodology isn't a problem. If one is trying to use an older version of software with newer camera(s) it can be problematic.

    If you still have LR available, you might try downloading the latest ACR engine update. The Adobe site probably has a compatibility table that will confirm if the latest version will run with your version of Lightroom.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    ... I said nothing wrong about LR in this thread all I said was I'm waiting on C1. It's my preferred software and my opinion is it's better as it always has been. ...
    Guy, that's exactly the point. We each have a preferred workflow using software with which we're comfortable.

    I haven't done any comparison testing between LR and C1 because I don't see the need either. I've also not had situations where LR caused the perceived problems others claim.

    I also am waiting impatiently to see what additional lens options are going to be available.

    My point in making the observation about LR bashing in this thread is that there are lots of really good photographers processing really great images in Lightroom, Camera One, and a lot of other software as well. Just like there are a lot of great images being processed on Windows computers as well as Macs.

    And, heaven forbid, there are even great pictures being made with Canon and Nikon cameras.
    David

    dmwfotos | davidmward.photography
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  23. #23
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by dmward View Post
    Guy, that's exactly the point. We each have a preferred workflow using software with which we're comfortable.

    I haven't done any comparison testing between LR and C1 because I don't see the need either. I've also not had situations where LR caused the perceived problems others claim.

    I also am waiting impatiently to see what additional lens options are going to be available.

    My point in making the observation about LR bashing in this thread is that there are lots of really good photographers processing really great images in Lightroom, Camera One, and a lot of other software as well. Just like there are a lot of great images being processed on Windows computers as well as Macs.

    And, heaven forbid, there are even great pictures being made with Canon and Nikon cameras.
    You had me shaking my head in agreement up to the very last sentence. ROTFLMAO. Im kidding of course, I have to get my rub in. Im like a athlete going back to where they dumped you from a team and you have to play that team and ya just wanna give them a jab or two. LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  24. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    David it had something to do with a U44M1P7 error which in Adobes wonderful way pointed me to a dead end with some extension manager...... Kern invalid

    Way too deep for this user and I refuse to talk to their foreign techs so I have trashed it entirely .... Didn't use it much and liked it even less so no great loss for me and one less aggregation to deal with.

    I have had photoshop since PS7 and might use this software 2-4 images a year... I can live without Adobe. I am glad for those who butter their bread with Adobe products as it makes no difference to me what someone else uses to shoot with or process with. Really it doesn't ... But for me my many year dislike for PS's user interface and the BS I went through upgrading LR from 5-6 were the straws that broke this a Camels back on this issue. The only reason I don't delete CS6 right now is the $750 I paid way back when for Mac PS7 and all the money I spent upgrading and on college courses to have and use the versions over the years. LR 5 and 6 I might of used on 30-40 images total over the years and decided I did not enjoy using it.

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    No CA
    Posts
    796
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    If I might interrupt to mention the subject of the thread:

    David, this is just what I needed to know. I downloaded the upgrade but hadn't decided yet about using it, because I often stitch a couple of files together and thought they'd be clumsy in size, even on the new MacPro. But your clouds persuade me that the highlight detail is worth all the 'real estate' that the uncompressed files will occupy.

    Thank you very much!

    Kirk
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #26
    Senior Member Ario Arioldi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Milano, Italy
    Posts
    784
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    Yup, C1 update, where are you? What takes you so long?

    Iridient works just fine. It's cheap and easy to learn.
    I suspect they are waiting for Apple to release the update of El Capitan so to officilally support also OSX 10.11
    Ario
    www.arioarioldi.net
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #27
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,194
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Hi,

    I am with Guy on this. Although I feel the "orange peel" artefacts are somewhat underdefined I am pretty sure they may be related to sharpening in Lightroom. Farther, I have seen quite a few demosaic artefacts in LR 6.2 with my P45+ back.

    Just to say, I am pretty happy with Lightroom, but if I want best detail from non OLP-filtered sensors Lightroom is not the tool for that. So the day I print 30"x40" I perhaps convert using RawTherapee to tiff and than process that tiff with Lightroom and print from Lightroom.

    I hoped Adobe would have a new processing pipe line in 6.0, but I guess we need to wait for the next version.

    Best regards
    Erik


    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    That's not exactly true. Orange peel effect was never in C1 and no one I saw took the effort to even try C1 on some of those star effect shots. There are others but I'm not going to even try to remember them. I said nothing wrong about LR in this thread all I said was I'm waiting on C1. It's my preferred software and my opinion is it's better as it always has been. I'm not here to prove it , convert anyone or even take the time to test it over and over again either. I've been using C1 for at least 10 years, maybe longer. If I need to I'll shot compressed until C1 is updated which should be tomorrow anyway. Photo plus actually starts tomorrow on the show floor. But besides all this crap which I consider over now I just want to hear what lenses Sony is coming out with. I have a open lens spot in my bag and I want to fill it. Lol

    I'm a lens whore and I can't be going around with a open hole in my bag. It must be filled.

  28. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    91
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Any chance of getting this thread back on track? I thought it was about comparing A7r2 compressed and uncompressed raw file results...
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  29. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Espoo, Finland
    Posts
    125
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by dmward View Post
    To my eye looking at the 100% detail, the uncompressed file has more detail at both ends of the tonal curve. That's good news.
    I've been saying (and so have others, like the guy who took the infamous star trail / artefact pic that pretty started the whole "Sony RAW compressions wars") all the time that there would be more details to be extracted from highlights in lossless files (where the compressed data is "thinnest") and equally many times I've been explained to that this is not true. I'll do my own testing once I have time and I've cured this flue, but to my eye the pulled clouds in your shots look better too.

    I took some indoor test shots of my own and after initial look I have this gut feeling that with uncompressed RAW certain vertical details like those found in animal eyes can take sharpening better without developing sharpening artefacts.
    Last edited by tn1krr; 22nd October 2015 at 06:09.

  30. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Miami - New York
    Posts
    122
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by dmward View Post
    I am having trouble understanding why a thread that compares compressed to uncompressed Sony A7RII raw files has turned into yet another harangue against Adobe software.

    There are several competent raw processing software options. None are perfect. Each has its attributes.

    I use Lightroom because I started with it during version 1 and have developed a workflow that works for me and an understanding about how it works that makes processing images quick and repeatable for me.

    I've used others, most notably Capture One several years ago with I was editing jobs with a colleague who had chosen C1 as his preferred processing software. Based on that experience I know it works. I never got comfortable with it and it never showed me capabilities that made me want to use it rather than Lightroom.

    I have the version of Capture that is offered by Sony for the A7RII. I suppose I could convert the test images to DNG and do the same comparison using Capture 1.

    It would take me quite a bit longer to accomplish because I have no idea what parameters to use.

    And, when I finished the thread would probably be overwhelmed with posts telling me what I did wrong.
    I too have based my workflow on the entire Adobe suite for many years. I have however, thanks to this forum, started to output the Sony files from C1 as tiffs for some images that had issues in LR. Since I exclusively use C1 for tethering, (as it is the industry standard), I've been trying to get comfortable in learning the processing side of it.

    I have not installed the update in my A7R2 yet to avoid any issues but am wondering, can I continue to shoot in compressed raw and use C1 until they update after the firmware update? Or am I locked out of C1 after the camera update?

    Thanks

  31. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Steve,
    I expect that the compressed option in the V2 firmware results in exactly the same raw file the camera produces in V1 firmware. So, you should be able to update the firmware and still be able to create files that C1 can open.

  32. #32
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by ShooterSteve View Post
    I too have based my workflow on the entire Adobe suite for many years. I have however, thanks to this forum, started to output the Sony files from C1 as tiffs for some images that had issues in LR. Since I exclusively use C1 for tethering, (as it is the industry standard), I've been trying to get comfortable in learning the processing side of it.

    I have not installed the update in my A7R2 yet to avoid any issues but am wondering, can I continue to shoot in compressed raw and use C1 until they update after the firmware update? Or am I locked out of C1 after the camera update?

    Thanks

    I think your fine, I have not tried yet though. But I did hear a update is coming this week at the photo plus show. It just opened today
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  33. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Steve,
    I just loaded the same set of test images into C1 for Sony. The compressed files are available the uncompressed are black.

    So, good to go and when C1 updates the uncompressed files should be visible without reimporting.
    David

    dmwfotos | davidmward.photography
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  34. #34
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Thanks David for checking.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  35. #35
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by dmward View Post
    Steve,
    I just loaded the same set of test images into C1 for Sony. The compressed files are available the uncompressed are black.

    So, good to go and when C1 updates the uncompressed files should be visible without reimporting.
    +1.

    Compressed raws and JPGs still work fine in C1 after updating the A7r2. Uncompressed raws are blacked out or one gets gibberish.
    I am running OS X El Capitan Version 10.11.1 (15B42).
    With best regards, K-H.

  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Knorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,002
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by dmward View Post
    Steve,
    I just loaded the same set of test images into C1 for Sony. The compressed files are available the uncompressed are black.

    So, good to go and when C1 updates the uncompressed files should be visible without reimporting.
    Well yes that may be true, but is compressed for the time being not the safer option ?
    Bart ...

  37. #37
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    I only shoot uncompressed now, have more than enough processing power and disk space!
    With best regards, K-H.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  38. #38
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    3,541
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    You can open and process A7RII uncompressed raws that have been converted to DNG. Most of my processing is done in LR, but I also occasionally use C1 and just tried this to see if it worked.
    Carl
    Gallery
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by scho View Post
    You can open and process A7RII uncompressed raws that have been converted to DNG. Most of my processing is done in LR, but I also occasionally use C1 and just tried this to see if it worked.
    I found that DNG Editor did not like the uncompressed files. However, Lightroom export will create the DNGs. They open in C1 8.3.3 for Sony.

  40. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Here are the same images, exported from Lightroom as DNG and then processed in C1 8.3.3 for Sony

    Uncompressed file on left.

    Highlight area Highlights 75, Shadows 100, EV 0

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	C1-HL-1.jpg 
Views:	46 
Size:	205.7 KB 
ID:	113457

    Shadow area

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	C1-SW-1.jpg 
Views:	45 
Size:	200.0 KB 
ID:	113458

    Highlight area Pushed 3 EV Highlights 75, Shadows 100.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	C1-HL-2.jpg 
Views:	43 
Size:	205.8 KB 
ID:	113459

    Shadow area

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	C1-SW-2.jpg 
Views:	38 
Size:	573.0 KB 
ID:	113460
    David

    dmwfotos | davidmward.photography
    Thanks 3 Member(s) thanked for this post

  41. #41
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim DE View Post
    When I'm not photographing something I am riding my motorcycle, busting clay birds, fly fishing the surf, or sitting in a tavern with friends eating wings and drinking beer during a Flyer's game. If I wanted to spend 5.5 hours in a state of aggravation I would just sit at home and talk with the wife (Or call Adobe Customer Service and talk to these non-english speaking bozo's) and save the green and cart fees.....
    lol. I have absolutely no interesting in a motorcycle, and find fishing about as boring and aggravating as you feel about golf. Isn’t it great that everyone isn’t the same?

    But to offer some perspective (not that anyone cares but I must defend the game ), where I play the average 18 hole round takes about 3.5 hours, all with really good friends so it’s as much a social thing (like your trip to the taverns). Some days I just stop on the way home and grab a quick 9 and it takes about an hour. Any endeavor which requires skill and a lot of work to get good at can be aggravating (fly fishing comes to mind), but as with anything else there is also deep satisfaction when the work is rewarded with success. Golf and photography happens to be the two things that “float my boat”, I’m pretty good at both, and even own a golf facility (impactgolfcenter.com) with my son (who is a professional golfer). So as retired professional photographer who now only has to do it because I enjoy it, finding time to do that as well as golf isn’t difficult.

    (sorry to get off topic).
    Last edited by Wayne Fox; 23rd October 2015 at 12:35.
    wayne
    My gallery
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  42. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    70
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Thanks for doing the side-by-side comparisons.

    I had been thinking about uncompressed RAW mainly in terms of avoiding artifacts. But I'm surprised by how much difference the lack of compression seems to make in terms of retaining highlight tones and reduced shadow noise.

    The files are big. But I've decided that it's worth the slight penalty in processing time and the increased storage space required.

    My early New Years resolution is to compensate by deleting more files, instead of leaving all those "maybe" images hanging around!

    --d

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by davidstock View Post
    Thanks for doing the side-by-side comparisons.

    I had been thinking about uncompressed RAW mainly in terms of avoiding artifacts. But I'm surprised by how much difference the lack of compression seems to make in terms of retaining highlight tones and reduced shadow noise.

    The files are big. But I've decided that it's worth the slight penalty in processing time and the increased storage space required.

    My early New Years resolution is to compensate by deleting more files, instead of leaving all those "maybe" images hanging around!

    --d
    David,
    You're welcome.

    The improved highlight and shadow detail is, for me a significant benefit.
    I probably should have stated in the post with the screen captures that the tone curve was set to linear in C1. I presume that flattens the shoulder and toe of the tone curve which helps with getting more detail into those areas. That adds to the benefit of the uncompressed data in those same areas.

  44. #44
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    +1 nice benefit
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  45. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    I still have to ask and wonder: How often is a 3+ stop push/pull necessary for an otherwise properly exposed image? The additional detail via uncompressed RAW adds only a small amount of actual detail, which most often resides in a very small portion of the image. IOW, who would ever notice?

  46. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Espoo, Finland
    Posts
    125
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by dandrewk View Post
    I still have to ask and wonder: How often is a 3+ stop push/pull necessary for an otherwise properly exposed image? The additional detail via uncompressed RAW adds only a small amount of actual detail, which most often resides in a very small portion of the image. IOW, who would ever notice?
    Someone recently presented a good example on the "stacking need" to push. If lens vignets heavily the lens correction alone can be 2 stops before any actual PP is done.

  47. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    70
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by dandrewk View Post
    I still have to ask and wonder: How often is a 3+ stop push/pull necessary for an otherwise properly exposed image? The additional detail via uncompressed RAW adds only a small amount of actual detail, which most often resides in a very small portion of the image. IOW, who would ever notice?
    With digital, "properly exposed" can mean more than one thing.

    Since the A7 series is almost "ISO-less," I rarely go past ISO 800, even in low light. Instead, I let the camera "underexpose," then push in ACR. I get about the same amount of shadow noise as I would get by raising the ISO. But I maintain much more highlight headroom.

    This is a mediocre snapshot made on a hazy evening at Coney Island. I attach it only to show the possibilities for pushing in post-processing to maintain wide tonal range.

    ISO 800, 1/80th, f3.5. I gave it a 2.8 stop push, plus 86 shadow boost. If I had shot this at ISO 6400, I never would have held the highlights.

    This image would have been a good candidate for uncompressed RAW, since there are some artifacts, and it calls for maximum quality in the highlights and shadows.


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	coney.jpg 
Views:	46 
Size:	743.7 KB 
ID:	113482


    --d
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Socorro, NM
    Posts
    404
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by davidstock View Post
    With digital, "properly exposed" can mean more than one thing.

    Since the A7 series is almost "ISO-less," I rarely go past ISO 800, even in low light. Instead, I let the camera "underexpose," then push in ACR. I get about the same amount of shadow noise as I would get by raising the ISO. But I maintain much more highlight headroom.

    This is a mediocre snapshot made on a hazy evening at Coney Island. I attach it only to show the possibilities for pushing in post-processing to maintain wide tonal range.

    ISO 800, 1/80th, f3.5. I gave it a 2.8 stop push, plus 86 shadow boost. If I had shot this at ISO 6400, I never would have held the highlights.

    This image would have been a good candidate for uncompressed RAW, since there are some artifacts, and it calls for maximum quality in the highlights and shadows.


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	coney.jpg 
Views:	46 
Size:	743.7 KB 
ID:	113482


    --d
    Both the A7S (and A7SII I assume) and the A7RII are not ISO-less. They have two different signal converters built-in to optimize for DR at base ISO and at high ISO.

  49. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    There are no doubt valid reasons to want lossless RAW. I am glad that we now have that option. I don't think I will ever use it, but I'm glad it's there.

  50. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    70
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing A7R2 compressed and uncompressed raw files

    Quote Originally Posted by hiepphotog View Post
    Both the A7S (and A7SII I assume) and the A7RII are not ISO-less. They have two different signal converters built-in to optimize for DR at base ISO and at high ISO.
    They are almost ISO-less. There are two distinct conversion gain bumps, the first one at around ISO 640. That's one reason I let auto-ISO go to 800.

    Jim Klasson discusses his exposure strategy for the A7RII here: http://blog.kasson.com/?p=11768 I do something a little different, but based on the same principles.

    Rishi Sanyal of dpRreview analyzes 7RII ISO invariance here: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/745...variance-study

    Both of these testers show that there is little penalty to be paid for pushing low light subjects in post. In Rishi's testing, there is virtually no difference in shadow noise when pushing two or three stops. Even pushing six stops (!), the penalty is only half a stop in the shadows. The advantage in the highlights, on the other hand, is dramatic.

    --d
    Thanks 2 Member(s) thanked for this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •