New JPEG format - end of RAW???
Apr 20, 2018 11:58:16 #
A new format - jpeg-xs has been announced. It uses a compression process that's simpler, faster and more energy-efficient than that of a standard JPEG, so while you end up with image and video files that are a little larger than standard, they are higher quality and faster to download. JPEG XS is going to start out in “professional applications like movie editing, space imagery and professional-grade cameras,” and consumer-grade electronics will follow on next.
Read full article here.
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/makers-of-jpeg-to-introduce-jpeg-xs?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=22489&utm_term=9028484&utm_content=390172
Read full article here.
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/makers-of-jpeg-to-introduce-jpeg-xs?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=22489&utm_term=9028484&utm_content=390172
Apr 20, 2018 12:17:31 #
Apr 20, 2018 12:40:30 #
I didn't see anything about being able to change white balance or exposure or other editing nondestructively like you can RAW files.
Apr 20, 2018 12:43:49 #
repleo wrote:
A new format - jpeg-xs has been announced. It use... (show quote)
Yawn.
No converted file format replaces raw.
Apr 20, 2018 12:51:25 #
Yea, it doesn't make me sad. I got to test and use .JPX a while back and that was a mistake. A hard disk failed and the backup was corrupted; I lost almost three years of pics when Win7 did not support the .DLL assc. with the extention.
Apr 20, 2018 13:22:18 #
burkphoto wrote:
Yawn.
No converted file format replaces raw.
No converted file format replaces raw.
Thank you, Burk.
Apr 20, 2018 13:50:38 #
bpulv
Loc: Buena Park, CA
burkphoto wrote:
Yawn.
No converted file format replaces raw.
No converted file format replaces raw.
RAW files contain all possible data to produce the highest quality print possible. ANY compressed format removes some of that data in the compression process. It goes back to a basic rule of physics; you can't get something for nothing. In the case of photo computer files, the trade off for small file size is reduced picture quality.
Apr 20, 2018 17:02:16 #
That's cool, a better JPEG; but as others have stated, it's not a replacement for RAW. My question is, you know the little tiny JPEG that's in the RAW data? Are they, whoever they are, going to replace it with the new format?
Apr 20, 2018 18:48:00 #
repleo wrote:
A new format - jpeg-xs has been announced. It use... (show quote)
Of course that will have no effect whatsoever on raw files!
Apr 21, 2018 09:46:54 #
bpulv wrote:
RAW files contain all possible data to produce the highest quality print possible. ANY compressed format removes some of that data in the compression process. It goes back to a basic rule of physics; you can't get something for nothing. In the case of photo computer files, the trade off for small file size is reduced picture quality.
Not all data compression algorithms are lossy. There are methods to express 14 zeros in a row without using 14 bits to do so. Lossless algorithms know to put all the zeros back in when decompressing the data for display or other form of output.
Apr 21, 2018 13:32:35 #
Apr 21, 2018 15:25:28 #
I can see that Sony would want to use an [XFine] which would be finer than [Extra Fine] because it would compress faster before writing. (But because it is larger, would the time saved in compression be more than the time lost in reading & writing to the SD card?) But would the new format still compress the 12, 14, or 16 bit color down to 8 bits, like all other JPEGs? RAW (uncompressed) is still RAW. But shooting both RAW+JPEG would probably still be compressed in the Sony cameras.
Apr 22, 2018 13:36:37 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.