[axl]

This thread might also be of some interest to those wondering about Jpegs, RAW etc.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-photography-knowledge-base/40647-s...-benifits.html

that post of yours, Peter, is exactly the reason I asked this question,
thanx for all the replies so far
as a result I'm giving Lightroom another go...

[Duplo]

I voted Tiff...

becasue that is the basic output from my RAW conversion.

I run all RAW through C1 4, where the basic PP, is done...

The output are saved as a 16bit tiff that are loaded into photoshop for final PP.

RAW and finalised unsharpened tiff are saved on 2 storage hardrives.

Full size and web size jpg are saved on local hardrive and a third storage hardrive.

As I do all my prints from 16bit tiff, I keep the tiff unsharpened and are able to create printfiles from that depending on output size fairly quickly.

[MRRiley]

I shoot RAW+, use in camera JPGs as a quick sort

ALL RAW and camera JPGs copied to 2 sets of duplicate DVDs/CDs (as required).

Open RAW in PS2 and adjust exposure, wb, etc... save as TIFF.

Edit the TIFFs, saving incrementally till I reach a final product.

Final TIFF is used for printing and is also resized and saved as a JPG for online use.

Original RAW file, initial, significant and final TIFFS and final JPG are saved on duplicate hard drives.

Original camera JPGs (on computer) are discarded after final TIFF and JPGs are complete.

Final TIFFs and JPGs saved to 2 duplicate sets of DVDs/CDs (as required).

(yes, I use a lot of DVDs!!!)

[SpecialK]

That's the beauty of Lightroom, The RAW is left untouched if you want to start over. It's non-destructive to the RAW file.

I believe all converters are non-destructive as they make a different file type.

[Canada_Rockies]

I see no disadvantages at all to shooting RAW, and possible advantages.

My processing sequence is to first import the images as PEF (that's what I shoot) using Adobe Lightroom. Every image from the card goes onto a backup drive on one of my USB ports, and the image is also saved on my working drive. Lightroom is a non - destructive editor, so the images are always original. This import procedure gives me the original PEF on two separate hard drives.

If the image needs work that only DxO can do, DxO automatically accepts the PEF and outputs DNG with its magical corrections. DxO automatically appends _DxO to the file name, so I know which is which.

I have also been known to use PT Lens for corrections, but still keep the original PEF, renaming the file.

[ftpaddict]

Keep as RAW. Why would you want to convert to TIFF? You gain nothing in information, and it even occupies more than a RAW file.

[patrickt]

I shoot raw, convert in LR2 to JPEG to send with emails or print, and save both the JPEGs, on my hard drive, and the raw files on DVDs.

[MRRiley]

Keep as RAW. Why would you want to convert to TIFF? You gain nothing in information, and it even occupies more than a RAW file.

Just try to take a RAW file to have it printed...SOME pro labs might be able to handle them but not many. Thus TIFF... and I don't care about the filesize.

[rfortson]

I believe all converters are non-destructive as they make a different file type.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a correct answer!

I don't know where people get the idea that raw files are somehow modified. I haven't seen a program yet that changes the raw file. All raw converters that I've ever heard of save the finished file in another format. You can save the raw settings (all programs handle this in a variety of ways), but when you go to export the file to something usable, you always save it as a different format. To do otherwise would defeat the purpose of shooting in a raw format.

[rfortson]

Some software (eg, the Pentax software) may force you to convert your images to another format in order to use them.

Hi Marc,

Why do you think the Pentax software forces you to convert from raw? In my experience, you can save it in a variety of formats (if you like), you can save the raw settings for that file (or group of files), and you can print the raw file after you've edited it. I've never seen where the Pentax software acts any differently from any other raw processor in terms of file handling.

Now, in terms of editing, yes, you've convinced me about that.

Just curious why you feel the Pentax software is somehow forcing a file format conversion.

[Marc Sabatella]

Just try to take a RAW file to have it printed...SOME pro labs might be able to handle them but not many. Thus TIFF... and I don't care about the filesize.

Right, but that's an only for the shots you intend to take elsewhere to printed. If that's something you do with a sizable percentage of your shot, then that would be reason to convert everything. Me, it's only a handful a year that get printed anywhere but at home, so I convert those one at a time as it becomes necessary.

[Marc Sabatella]

Why do you think the Pentax software forces you to convert from raw? In my experience, you can save it in a variety of formats (if you like), you can save the raw settings for that file (or group of files), and you can print the raw file after you've edited it. I've never seen where the Pentax software acts any differently from any other raw processor in terms of file handling.

So, let me get this straight. Using the Pentax software, I can browse my PEF files with the Browser, go into PPL of them to process some of them, exit the processor *without converting*, and see the changes reflected in the Browser? And these changes are remembered forever, including after I've exited the Browser and come back? And if I decide I want to do further processing PPL, I can simply re-enter PPL and find everything just as I left it, without having to do anything special to make this happen? And if I want to then do further editing to the image that cannot be done via PPL, I can send the PEF file itself off to an editor and find the processing I've already done intact, giving me a starting point for further editing? Similarly, if I feel like printing a set of images form the browser, or view them as a slide slow, or generate medium-resolution web conversions, I can select a bunch of PEF files from the browser and have them printed/viewed/converted with all the processing I've done intact?

If so, I can't see how using the version of the software that came with my K200D. When I exit PPL, my changes are lost unless I convert the file format. And if I do that, I of course see my changes intact in the converted file, but when i return to the browser, my file looks exactly as it started - none of my changed are reflected in the browser. Of course, from PPL, I can also save the settings I used, but again, these are completely ignored when I return to the browser. They are even completely ignored if I return to PPL - I have to explicitly reload the settings. And the save and load dialogs don't even give me filenames based on the current image name - I have to actually type in a name for the INI file both when saving and loading, and hope I get the right one for the image in question. And these settings are useful only from within PPL - if I want to do further editing with those settings intact, there is no way to do so from the PEF file. I have to convert to another format first. Same if I want to print a bunch of images from the browser, or view them in a slide show, or generate low-resolution web conversions, or anything else I might want to do: if I select the PEF files, an previous processing I made is ignored entirely. The only way to get my processing to be used is to convert to another format and work with the converted versions.

Again, I'm not sure what I am not doing to explain myself correctly, but this is *completely* different from what modern applications do. With modern applications - such as LR, which you are now using, yes - the workflow is exactly as I describe it above. That's night and day in terms of file handling! To the point where you couldn't pay me to shoot RAW if forced to use the Pentax software.

Just curious why you feel the Pentax software is somehow forcing a file format conversion.

It is if you want to *see* your processing after you are done, or do anything else with those images.

[heatherslightbox]

I keep both RAW and JPG pics, with the idea that the RAW images are my "negatives" and the JPG images being the ones that I'm either printing out or uploading to my accounts on either Photobucket or PBase for public viewing and embedding in emails and sites like this one and dpreview.

I've been thinking about how best to archive my images (both RAW and JPG) and I'm getting some good ideas from this thread.

Heather

[rfortson]

So, let me get this straight. Using the Pentax software, I can browse my PEF files with the Browser, go into PPL of them to process some of them, exit the processor *without converting*, and see the changes reflected in the Browser? And these changes are remembered forever, including after I've exited the Browser and come back? And if I decide I want to do further processing PPL, I can simply re-enter PPL and find everything just as I left it, without having to do anything special to make this happen? And if I want to then do further editing to the image that cannot be done via PPL, I can send the PEF file itself off to an editor and find the processing I've already done intact, giving me a starting point for further editing? Similarly, if I feel like printing a set of images form the browser, or view them as a slide slow, or generate medium-resolution web conversions, I can select a bunch of PEF files from the browser and have them printed/viewed/converted with all the processing I've done intact?

If so, I can't see how using the version of the software that came with my K200D. When I exit PPL, my changes are lost unless I convert the file format. And if I do that, I of course see my changes intact in the converted file, but when i return to the browser, my file looks exactly as it started - none of my changed are reflected in the browser. Of course, from PPL, I can also save the settings I used, but again, these are completely ignored when I return to the browser. They are even completely ignored if I return to PPL - I have to explicitly reload the settings. And the save and load dialogs don't even give me filenames based on the current image name - I have to actually type in a name for the INI file both when saving and loading, and hope I get the right one for the image in question. And these settings are useful only from within PPL - if I want to do further editing with those settings intact, there is no way to do so from the PEF file. I have to convert to another format first. Same if I want to print a bunch of images from the browser, or view them in a slide show, or generate low-resolution web conversions, or anything else I might want to do: if I select the PEF files, an previous processing I made is ignored entirely. The only way to get my processing to be used is to convert to another format and work with the converted versions.

Again, I'm not sure what I am not doing to explain myself correctly, but this is *completely* different from what modern applications do. With modern applications - such as LR, which you are now using, yes - the workflow is exactly as I describe it above. That's night and day in terms of file handling! To the point where you couldn't pay me to shoot RAW if forced to use the Pentax software.



It is if you want to *see* your processing after you are done, or do anything else with those images.

You have to open any raw converter to "see" your edits. In PPL, you have to open your raw settings (one step). I don't see that as a hardship, as many programs are the same way.

Obviously we differ on our opinions of the Pentax software. I've used it to great effect for the last couple of years (and yes, I tried several different raw converters). I found it to be easy to use (once I understood the interface) and found that the raw conversion has consistently been as good or better than the other programs I tried, including Adobe Camera Raw (though you can get the same results with pretty much all of them - it's just PPL took me less steps).

Obviously, YMMV.

[Marc Sabatella]

You have to open any raw converter to "see" your edits.

But that's just my point - what you are saying here is *not* true! In a program like LR or ACDSee, the edits are *always* visible from the browser - no need to take them individually into a RAW converter. That is, in the main browser window, the thumbs reflect your edits. If you choose to view an image full screen, that view reflects your edits. If you choose to enlarge your view to 100%, it still reflects your edits. If you wish to select a few thumbs (all of which reflect your edits) and them in larger versions side by side, the larger versions all reflect your edits. If you select a group of thumbs (all of which reflect your edits) to run some sort of batch operation on, the output reflects your edits too. If you choose to do further editing that cannot be done via non-destructive RAW processing, the image taken to the editor reflects your edits. Your edits are *never* NOT visible, and *no* extra steps are required to save or load settings as you browse.

Whereas with PPL, the browser *never* shows you the edits. There is *no way* to get it to do so. *None* of the operations I described above are possible. The only way to see your edits is to take your images one at a time into PPL and then explicitly load the file you hopefully remembered to save with the settings (and hopefully you'll find the right file for that image). And once you've got your edits in place within PPL, the *only* things you can actually *do* with the image while in PPL are convert it to another format or print it.

I can understand deciding you don't mind having to convert all your images to another format to work with them in the way I'm describing, or maybe you just never do any of the things I'm describing. But there really is no question that this is a difference between the programs: the Pentax software requires conversion to another format in order to do the things I'm describing, and LR & ACDSee (and Aperture, and Lightzone, and presumably other) do not.

Obviously we differ on our opinions of the Pentax software. I've used it to great effect

My issue with it has nothing to do with the effects - I have no doubt it is capable of great results. I'm talking just about use model here.