Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Converting RAW to 16bit TIFF
Mar 19, 2018 11:35:00   #
alberio Loc: Casa Grande AZ
 
I am curious why does converting a 17-27 mb RAW file to 16bit TIFF it ends up 102 mb? I'm still ignorant about raw and tiff.

Reply
Mar 19, 2018 11:55:11   #
Rongnongno Loc: FL
 
TIFF is a standard

raw data files are specific to camera brands and models so not a standard anyway you look at it.

TIFF is larger because it is usually uncompressed and has 'data raw does not have'. I do not have the specifics, sorry.

Also raw is 10~14 bit (max is 16 is really advanced cameras) when TIFF is 16 bit. THAT is also a cause for the size.

Reply
Mar 19, 2018 11:59:53   #
ulfeld Loc: New York City
 
Thank You !

Reply
 
 
Mar 19, 2018 12:00:50   #
bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA
 
All that the RAW file has to record is the one-color data from each pixel. The RAW converter program interpolates the one-color per pixel RAW file into the three color per pixel TIFF file.

Reply
Mar 19, 2018 12:05:18   #
ulfeld Loc: New York City
 
Thank you !

Reply
Mar 19, 2018 12:08:46   #
bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA
 
You are welcome! Truth is that I had no idea so I googled it.

Reply
Mar 19, 2018 12:18:58   #
alberio Loc: Casa Grande AZ
 
Rongnongno wrote:
TIFF is a standard

raw data files are specific to camera brands and models so not a standard anyway you look at it.

TIFF is larger because it is usually uncompressed and has 'data raw does not have'. I do not have the specifics, sorry.

Also raw is 10~14 bit (max is 16 is really advanced cameras) when TIFF is 16 bit. THAT is also a cause for the size.


Thank you for your reply. I also notice it doesn't have as many settings in the Canon DPP for tiff as it does for RAW

Reply
 
 
Mar 19, 2018 12:21:11   #
alberio Loc: Casa Grande AZ
 
bsprague wrote:
All that the RAW file has to record is the one-color data from each pixel. The RAW converter program interpolates the one-color per pixel RAW file into the three color per pixel TIFF file.


Thank you, I learn every day from everyone here.

Reply
Mar 20, 2018 11:36:11   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
Most cameras shoot RAW as 12-bit or 14-bit... while a TIFF file is typically 16-bit.

16-bit has about 64 times more possible colors and tonalities than 14-bit (4.39 trillion).

16-bit has more than 4000 times more possible colors and tonalities than 12-bit (68.68 billion).

16-bit has more than 16000 times more possible colors and tonalities than 8-bit (16.78 million).

16-bit images have a color palette of 281 trillion possible colors and tonalities!

When you open the image in post-processing software, it interpolates a 12 or 14-bit image as 16-bit. In a sense it "expands" the tonal information to fill the space.

Only a few cameras shoot 16-bit natively (most I'm aware of are medium format digital).

When you "shoot JPEGs", the camera actually takes a RAW image (all do, initially) and then immediately converts it to an 8-bit JPEG "in camera", using the settings of the camera. Whatever the camera deems "extraneous" is thrown away.

Shooting RAW requires you post-process the image later in software, but gives you opportunity to change a lot of the settings that were noted in, but not applied to the RAW file.

In most cases it's best to post-process and "work" your images in 16-bit mode. While it's possible to convert it to 16-bit, it makes little sense to do so if the image has already been "reduced" to an 8-bit JPEG... much of the data need to work the image in 16-bit mode has already been thrown away.

If you've been working on an image in 16-bit mode and need to close the image, but will want to open and work on it further, best to save as 16-bit TIFF (or PSD, etc.)

Once the work on the image is finished, for most purposes it's fine to save the image as 8-bit JPEG. It's a more common and widely viewable format than 16-bit TIFF or PSD (etc.) 8-bit files are much smaller and more practical for most purposes. And you won't see any difference between 8-bit and 16-bit finished images when viewed on computer screen or in prints made with most processes. 16-bit may not be possible with some printers. Or, if possible, may make printing slower and consume more ink, while not improving the result in any way. But check with your printer... some processes can utilize higher bit depth files.

More info here (and a lot of other places online if you Google it):

https://www.diyphotography.net/8-bit-vs-16-bit-color-depth-use-matters/
https://photography.tutsplus.com/articles/bit-depth-explained-in-depth--photo-8514
https://laurashoe.com/2011/08/09/8-versus-16-bit-what-does-it-really-mean/

Reply
Mar 20, 2018 12:07:53   #
alberio Loc: Casa Grande AZ
 
Thank you amfoto1. Very informative and understandable by me. I'm still wondering why in Canons DPP it views the tiff file like a jpeg and I dont have nearly all the settings as I do in RAW.

amfoto1 wrote:
Most cameras shoot RAW as 12-bit or 14-bit... while a TIFF file is typically 16-bit.

16-bit has about 64 times more possible colors and tonalities than 14-bit (4.39 trillion).

16-bit has more than 4000 times more possible colors and tonalities than 12-bit (68.68 billion).

16-bit has more than 16000 times more possible colors and tonalities than 8-bit (16.78 million).

16-bit images have a color palette of 281 trillion possible colors and tonalities!

When you open the image in post-processing software, it interpolates a 12 or 14-bit image as 16-bit. In a sense it "expands" the tonal information to fill the space.

Only a few cameras shoot 16-bit natively (most I'm aware of are medium format digital).

When you "shoot JPEGs", the camera actually takes a RAW image (all do, initially) and then immediately converts it to an 8-bit JPEG "in camera", using the settings of the camera. Whatever the camera deems "extraneous" is thrown away.

Shooting RAW requires you post-process the image later in software, but gives you opportunity to change a lot of the settings that were noted in, but not applied to the RAW file.

In most cases it's best to post-process and "work" your images in 16-bit mode. While it's possible to convert it to 16-bit, it makes little sense to do so if the image has already been "reduced" to an 8-bit JPEG... much of the data need to work the image in 16-bit mode has already been thrown away.

If you've been working on an image in 16-bit mode and need to close the image, but will want to open and work on it further, best to save as 16-bit TIFF (or PSD, etc.)

Once the work on the image is finished, for most purposes it's fine to save the image as 8-bit JPEG. It's a more common and widely viewable format than 16-bit TIFF or PSD (etc.) 8-bit files are much smaller and more practical for most purposes. And you won't see any difference between 8-bit and 16-bit finished images when viewed on computer screen or in prints made with most processes. 16-bit may not be possible with some printers. Or, if possible, may make printing slower and consume more ink, while not improving the result in any way. But check with your printer... some processes can utilize higher bit depth files.

More info here (and a lot of other places online if you Google it):

https://www.diyphotography.net/8-bit-vs-16-bit-color-depth-use-matters/
https://photography.tutsplus.com/articles/bit-depth-explained-in-depth--photo-8514
https://laurashoe.com/2011/08/09/8-versus-16-bit-what-does-it-really-mean/
Most cameras shoot RAW as 12-bit or 14-bit... whil... (show quote)

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.