Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-17-2008, 07:34 AM   #16
Veteran Member
OrenMc's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,902
I shoot raw + 1. The reasoning behind is when I download I can view files on windows without any conversion. Therefor I have a photo to look at to see if its worth the effort to PP.

I may be missing something and there may be any easier way as I see a lot of folks just shoot raw. I downloaded a program that allowed me to view these ( raw ) with windows but it was slow. I have 1g ram but it was still a timely prosses. So I just view the jpeg and decide if its a keeper or not.

11-17-2008, 07:56 AM   #17
Veteran Member
WheresWaldo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 498
All those people that shoot Raw+Jpeg to make it easier to view for approval or later PP may not fully understand the intent of installing a Codec. The PEF codec was listed earlier in htis thread. Once installed Windows users can view the JPG portion of PEFs within Explorer and by extension Windows Photo Gallery or Windows Photo and FAX Viewer. No applications to install! Works with computers at the minimum Windows hardware configuration levels! Not any slower than viewing JPGs!

OrenMC, I was not picking on you, just mentioning that their are easier ways. Now if you shoot pretty good straight from the camera, require little or no post processing. The RAW+JPG will save one step if you give away the JPG and keep the higher fidelity RAW for yourself. Otherwise you have to extract the JPG, this is the extra step.

I think with the advent of applications that can use RAW workflow and growing numbers of photographers that PP the need for JPG becomes less and less. Exporting to JPG from Lightroom/Elements/Photoshop etc is so simple that there may come a day when we only use JPG for web viewing or sending updated SD cards to our relatives so they can view new pictures on their digital picture frames (that we gave them as Christmas/Hanukkah presents).

Of course there are many who just shoot to view on their monitors, or on CD/DVD to view on their TV, or like the example above on digital picture frames. Many of those people do not know what PP is or for that matter care (my daughter never PPs, she just shows all her friends the pictures either on-line or on her iPhone, why does she need Raw at all?). For them shooting Jpeg is ideal. no fuss, no hassle, just shoot and live with the results. For them they are wondering why anyone is even having this conversation at all.
11-17-2008, 10:49 AM   #18
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by OrenMc Quote
I may be missing something and there may be any easier way as I see a lot of folks just shoot raw. I downloaded a program that allowed me to view these ( raw ) with windows but it was slow.
I think most of us shooting RAW only are using browsers that display RAW images fast enough to make those sorts of decisions. Especially, programs like Lightroom, Aperture, ACDSee Pro, Lightzone, and others where the browser *is* your RAW processor.
11-17-2008, 12:09 PM   #19
Veteran Member
WheresWaldo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 498
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
I think most of us shooting RAW only are using browsers that display RAW images fast enough to make those sorts of decisions. Especially, programs like Lightroom, Aperture, ACDSee Pro, Lightzone, and others where the browser *is* your RAW processor.
@ Marc, I am not sure the issue is the speed of rendering the image. Even with the codec installed when you open a directory full of PEF images it takes a bit of time for Explorer to render them all, this only gets slower as the size of the PEF increases. Compare a folder of 100 PEFs, from a 6mp DS to the 14.6mp K20D and you will know what I mean. Some want to make the decision to PP before they open Lightroom, Aperture or others.

@ OrenMc - maybe its time to budget for a bigger/faster/better computer. If your job is secure I think we are going to see a lot of well equiped PCs for really good prices after Black Friday and through Christmas.

11-17-2008, 12:58 PM   #20
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by WheresWaldo Quote
Even with the codec installed when you open a directory full of PEF images it takes a bit of time for Explorer to render them all, this only gets slower as the size of the PEF increases. Compare a folder of 100 PEFs, from a 6mp DS to the 14.6mp K20D and you will know what I mean. Some want to make the decision to PP before they open Lightroom, Aperture or others.
??? If you have a program like the ones I'm talking about, you wouldn't be trying to use Explorer to do your browsing in the first place. Everything I do - including browsing thumbs, viewing full screen previews, and doing my adjustments to my files - is done in ACDSee Pro. And I'm LR users would say the same. With ACDSee, a full screen preview does indeed take an extra couple of seconds unless one uses or converts to DNG and can use the embedded JPEG, but you can still get smaller previews more or less instantly. And of course, if you then decide to process the file, the program is already loaded. The whole workflow is faster if you cut out the intermediate step of browsing JPEG's in a different program.
11-17-2008, 01:13 PM   #21
Veteran Member
WheresWaldo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 498
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
??? If you have a program like the ones I'm talking about, you wouldn't be trying to use Explorer to do your browsing in the first place. Everything I do - including browsing thumbs, viewing full screen previews, and doing my adjustments to my files - is done in ACDSee Pro. And I'm LR users would say the same. With ACDSee, a full screen preview does indeed take an extra couple of seconds unless one uses or converts to DNG and can use the embedded JPEG, but you can still get smaller previews more or less instantly. And of course, if you then decide to process the file, the program is already loaded. The whole workflow is faster if you cut out the intermediate step of browsing JPEG's in a different program.
I didn't mean to imply that I was doing it that way, just that you could do it like that. I also made the assumption that OrenMc installed some sort of viewer application rather than assuming that he was actually loading up his editor. That was probably way off on my part. I am using the trial version of LR until I figure out what I really want to use, so I have no issue "seeing" RAW files without the added storage needs of additional JPG images.
11-17-2008, 04:35 PM   #22
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Barrie, ON
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 174
Or use Ubuntu (Linux) with RawTherapee. Ubuntu comes with the .pef codec installed, and just open the photo from the photo browser with RawTherapee.
11-17-2008, 07:10 PM   #23
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,901
QuoteQuote:
I think most of us shooting RAW only are using browsers that display RAW images fast enough to make those sorts of decisions. Especially, programs like Lightroom, Aperture, ACDSee Pro, Lightzone, and others where the browser *is* your RAW processor.
Ah, sort of. I do a batch "Extract a jpg" through Pentax Photo Browser tools (not Photo Lab) as it is much quicker than a conversion - about 1/4 the time or less. Then, I use the now-defunct (?) Firehand.com Ember to view them. Browser is way too slow when deleting files, so I resort to my 1997-era file manager for that.


Last edited by SpecialK; 11-18-2008 at 08:12 PM.
11-17-2008, 07:23 PM   #24
Veteran Member
OrenMc's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,902
I use Element 5 to PP. I could very easily be doing somehting wrong. I don't remember what program I installed before, I believe it was Codec though. But it just seemed to take forever to load the PEF file. Jpeg was of course faster. It really doesn't take that long to go through the jpegs and view and delete before I do whatever PP needed. I convert to tiff if I am saving.
Like I said, I may be making this much harder than it has to be. Thats how I am sometimes
11-17-2008, 09:24 PM   #25
Veteran Member
WheresWaldo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 498
QuoteOriginally posted by OrenMc Quote
I use Element 5 to PP. I could very easily be doing somehting wrong. I don't remember what program I installed before, I believe it was Codec though. But it just seemed to take forever to load the PEF file. Jpeg was of course faster. It really doesn't take that long to go through the jpegs and view and delete before I do whatever PP needed. I convert to tiff if I am saving.
Like I said, I may be making this much harder than it has to be. Thats how I am sometimes
Ok, I see something and I will make a suggestion. Going from JPEG to TIFF is like printing a picture then running it through your scanner. I am not sure about Elements 5, the last version of Elements I used was 2.0, but I think you can still download Camera Raw 4.6. It has support for PEFs, including the Km (K2000). Now using Camera Raw is different than the codec. You do not have to install the codec to use PEFs in Elements. The codec allows Windows to view thumbnails of the PEFs like it already knows how to do with JPEG, TIFF, GIF, PNG and other formats. With the codec installed you could slide your SDHC card into a reader and explore its contents to see which ones you want to PP in Elements, That shouldn't take much longer than what you are doing currently. Select your PEF files, copy to your HDD, edit in Elements, save finished images as JPEG.

The good thing about editing PEFs is that all photo adjustments are reversible. Editing JPEGs modifies the data directly. So if you ever wanted to change the way you PPed a file at a later date PEF allows you to start from where you left off or a start fresh or even somewhere in between.

But don't think I am trying to convince you to use PEF. There are people smarter than me that can explain why using RAW files is better than the alternatives, a Google search will reveal countless articles that explain why a RAW based workflow is beneficial. Either way have fun and take lots of images.
11-17-2008, 10:13 PM   #26
Veteran Member
OrenMc's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,902
Bear with me please,
I think you misunderstood me. I don't convert jpeg to tiff, I convert pef to tiff for saving.
I use an elements program to download from camera to a file on my computer. I am then able to view the +1 jpegs ( in windows ) and select the one I want to convert. I then convert that photo ( the pef file) using Pentax Photo lab to tiff. Remember, I have two files +1 jpeg and pef.
I don't know, I thought saving in tiff was better becase it is a uncompressed file and there is no data lost when saving.
I tried using DNG files in elements 5 but couldn't figure out how to convert dng to jpeg. I doesn't seem to have that option.
11-17-2008, 10:48 PM   #27
Veteran Member
WheresWaldo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 498
QuoteOriginally posted by OrenMc Quote
Bear with me please,
I think you misunderstood me. I don't convert jpeg to tiff, I convert pef to tiff for saving.
I use an elements program to download from camera to a file on my computer. I am then able to view the +1 jpegs ( in windows ) and select the one I want to convert. I then convert that photo ( the pef file) using Pentax Photo lab to tiff. Remember, I have two files +1 jpeg and pef.
Ok, I did totally misunderstand that.
QuoteOriginally posted by OrenMc Quote
I don't know, I thought saving in tiff was better becase it is a uncompressed file and there is no data lost when saving.
I tried using DNG files in elements 5 but couldn't figure out how to convert dng to jpeg. I doesn't seem to have that option.
No need to save as tiff. The compression used in PEF is lossless, like ZIP or RAR files. So there is no loss of data with PEF or editing in PEF. Unless you must use TIFF for specific applications, it is pretty much a dead format. That will save some time and space, just save the PEF always.

As far as DNG > JPG or PEF > JPG you can do this in Elements one file at a time using File > Save As... or using the Batch Image Converter. The batch converter is at File > Process Multiple Files....
11-18-2008, 01:15 PM   #28
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by OrenMc Quote
Bear with me please,
I think you misunderstood me. I don't convert jpeg to tiff, I convert pef to tiff for saving.
Why? Why not keep the file as PEF? Doesn't Elements automatically save the adjustments you used for each file? You should need to convert to another format just to save your changes.

Now, if you *also* want a converted version of the file for web use or some such, then by all means, you'd want to generate one - but JPEG would be etter for that, and no need to make it full resolution or top quality.
11-18-2008, 07:32 PM   #29
Veteran Member
OrenMc's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,902
Elements doesn't do raw conversion. Thats why I use the software that came with the camera. I haven't been able to figure out how to convert dng to jpeg either.

I know I really need to work on my workflow. It is kind of a pain the way I do it.

Yes element will automatically save but I don't do it that way. I don't use elements to organize and don't ask me why.

This is one thing I keep telling myself I need to do. As it is I just sort of haphazardly set things up. So this has been a good topic for me.
11-18-2008, 08:23 PM   #30
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,901
QuoteQuote:
Elements doesn't do raw conversion.
Wow, I wonder what I have been doing to thousands of PEFs in Elements 6, then?

Elements 6 worked straight out on K100D PEFs, but I had to update the ACR (Adobe Camera RAW) plug-in to get it work with K20D PEFs. Just download it and put it in the "plugin" folder.

File > Open
Click on PEF and open it.
You should be in the RAW editor. Tweak settings as desired.
Bottom right corner -----> Open image.
This gets you into the "regular" editor. Tweak settings as desired.
File > Save As.
In the "type" dialog box, scroll down to JPG.

Elements saves the RAW setting tweaks (but not the JPG tweaks) in a small XML file.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, compression, dslr, file, jpeg, pef, photography, post, quality, star, web
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What difference does JPEG star quality make? Marcus Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 08-07-2010 06:56 AM
JPEG, RAW, JPEG + RAW...huh? Raptorman Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 14 12-22-2009 11:49 AM
K-x vs K-m JPEG quality deadwolfbones Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 11-21-2009 08:47 PM
JPEG gallery quality Duncan J Murray Site Suggestions and Help 1 04-27-2008 02:38 PM
Pentax K10D - RAW or jpeg for maximum image quality? rrobinson54 Photographic Technique 31 09-09-2007 11:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:27 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top