rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Just about any editor and image viewer (including most of the freeware programs) can open and display TIFF files. PSD... well, not so much. As I sometimes use more than one program for editing an image, I like to work with a format that is accepted by all editors.

blackest Loc: Ireland

If DNG is a standardized format why does adobe dng converter give different versions of DNG for example photo shop cs6 cannot open dng files later than version 7.1

Logically then dng is an evolving format.

incidentally Dcraw.c (source code) is an open source program which is updated regularly to convert raw files to a common format It is used by many programs as a raw preprocessor, this means the main raw editor can be used with newer raw formats.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Good to know. Is it available as a stand-alone compiled program for Mac, Win, or Linux?

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

Thanks for the reply.

blackest Loc: Ireland

Short answer Yes

Long answer follows :

Dcraw is compiled on windows definitely Its used by lightzone so should be on mac and linux too...


Ok I had a look at lightzone on my osx install(select open contents and in the resources/java folder is dcraw-lz you need to go to that folder in the terminal (it uses a library file in that folder).


http://vkphotoblog.blogspot.ie/2014/05/dcraw-921-for-os-x-mavericks-users.html
may help here any way -i -v are a couple of switches for the program.

so i pointed a raw file to it at the command line the result was

Filename: /Volumes/darkstar/Users/john/Desktop/104_PANA/P1040002.RW2
Timestamp: Fri Dec 19 07:14:57 2014
Camera: Panasonic DMC-G5
ISO speed: 1600
Shutter: 1/15.0 sec
Aperture: f/3.5
Focal length: 14.0 mm
Embedded ICC profile: no
Number of raw images: 1
Thumb size: 1920 x 1440
Full size: 4816 x 3472
Image size: 4624 x 3472
Output size: 4624 x 3472
Raw colors: 3
Filter pattern: BGGRBGGRBGGRBGGR
Camera RGB Profile: 0.790679 0.167453 0.041868 -0.037062 1.409395 -0.372333 0.046640 -0.454408 1.407768
Daylight multipliers: 2.300752 1.000067 1.750309
Camera multipliers: 452.000000 265.000000 586.000000 0.000000

(I have a dng of this same file and it reads the same but has a smaller preview jpeg built in)

http://vkphotoblog.blogspot.ie/2014/05/dcraw-921-for-os-x-mavericks-how-to-use.html

dcraw_lz -v -w -o 4 -q 3 +M -6 -T filename.rw2 creates a tiff file where the original .rw2 (panasonic raw file is)

that worked a 16bit tiff file :) read these two pages i've linked, to see how to do it a little less clunky.

Don't have lightzone ?

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/27884602/dcraw/dcraw (hopefully working still) A standalone version of dcRaw :)

his third post talks about a gui for DcRaw , thats lightzone :)


Theres a better set of switches too.

Easy fix with options -H (to recover highlights) and -b (to improve the image brightness after highlight recovery, let's add those to the standard set of options:

dcraw -v -w +M -o 4 -q 3 -6 -T -H 9 -b 4 _dsf8880.raf

anyway thats my try it out as i write the reply test of dcraw on osx the command line should be the same for windows and linux.

They are big files

.rw2 raw file 19.5Meg
.ppm file 48Meg (portable pixmap)
.Tiff file 96 Meg
.dng file 14 Meg (dng converter)

http://rawtherapee.com/blog/rawtherapee-4.2-is-out

another alternative for raw

Brian in Whitby Loc: Whitby, Ontario, Canada

I would like to add to this idea if you process the raw file there is no need to save it at all since the edits are all retained in the database and/or the exif file (depending on the software you use. The raw file is not altered. It is only necessary to save of convert to another file type when you want to use it is some way. To my way of thinking a TIFF file is a waste of good hard drive spaceif it is used just for storage. Depending on the end use of the photo, JPG is probably good enough for any but the most picky of print jobs and then only if the printer is capable of reproducing the colour space. In most cases JPG at its highest resolution i "Too good" for viewing on a monitor or e-mailing. The files are much larger than you need.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

This is true. If you are using Lightroom, you can apply adjustments to the file while really don't modify the file. Instead, it creates a record of what the adjustment settings are so it can recreate the same result the next time you look at it. You don't have to save to another format at all and can look at on your computer screen whenever you want to.

And only when you want to send a copy of the picture somewhere do you need to convert. And even after you convert, you still have the original unchanged RAW file with Lightroom remembering all the adjustments.

And by the way, when you exit Lightroom and it asks to make a back up, it is talking about a backup of the settings, not a backup of the source files.

Brian in Whitby Loc: Whitby, Ontario, Canada

AfterShot Pro handles it a different way. It creates a new exif file while keeping the original. A feature I like.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

However, when you use PS and any of the NIK Collection tools or others, then you must save a TIFF file.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

It is not compression that makes the difference, as in fact most TIFF files are also compressed. The distinction is using either "lossless" compression with TIFF (e.g., LZW or Adobe Deflate) as opposed to the inherently very lossy JPEG compression.

Even when set for minimum compression at the highest quality a JPEG file is significantly changed because of the lossy compression. That means the data set in memory at the time can never be reproduced from the data saved in the file. With a TIFF file, even though it is compressed, the next time that file is read into memory the data set generated will be exactly, down to the last bit, the same as the data set used to write the file. That can be repeated thousands of times and the data will not change.

Brian in Whitby Loc: Whitby, Ontario, Canada

However, The lossy compression of JPG is not an issue if that is the final copy.