[HUG ] Re: IMG: Triptych

Hi Q.G.,

Spot on, thank you.  Obviously, you get what I am saying...

As I said in another post, this really isn't that hard to get.  But, as with
other aspects of digital imaging, this, too, appears to be quite
misunderstood.

Regards,

Austin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: hasselblad-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:hasselblad-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Q.G. de Bakker
> Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 1:43 AM
> To: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [HUG ] Re: IMG: Triptych
>
>
> Guys,
>
> Both RAW and TIFF are file formats.
>
> TIFF is a container format, and can contain many different formats.
> Loss-lessly compressed formats. Lossy JPEGs. And even RAW.
>
> The controversy here is about the 'raw'-state that is being
> suggested by the
> RAW file format name.
> As Austin correctly points out, it isn't as uncooked as the name suggests.
>
> And despite the lack of such an suggestion, a TIFF file can
> contain data in
> an equally 'uncooked' state.
>
>
> Using RAW files does not magically change the data that are available.
> And data can be dumped in many different file formats without a single
> limitation or problem.
> (For a project years ago, i have recorded and dumped image data in a WAV
> sound file. It contained exactly the same image data as the run length
> loss-lessly compressed BMP-file and TIFF-file i later on in the process
> converted the data into. The WAV-file then was a RAW file avant
> la lettre.
> The data were 'cooked' in the conversion, but all the cooking did was
> 'synchronize'/'line up' the lines of the image (that was captured
> line after
> line). So the BMP and TIFF files did contain raw data too in
> exactly the way
> the modern day RAW files contain 'raw' data.)
>
>
> So it boils down to the question what the software does to the
> data before
> it is dumped into a file (RAW or other).
>
> The RAW-format was invented to provide a way to escape/bypass the image
> processing routines built into all image capture devices.
> But not all: the true raw 'data' have to be cooked a bit to make
> them fit a
> format that a computer can understand. They have to be changed from
> electrical curents and potentials into data.
> How much processing is done before data is dumped into a RAW file
> depends,
> not only on manufacturer, but also on the 'machine' inside a particular
> device.
>
> TIFF files can equally well be used to contain the same data.
> And some devices (scanners mostly) do indeed allow to dump the
> same data in
> a uncompressed or loss-lessly compressed TIFF file.
>
> It all depends on the software involved.
> Not (!) the file format the data are dumped in.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Rabiner" <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 6:23 AM
> Subject: [HUG ] Re: IMG: Triptych
>
>
> Reading this thread you'd think  that there was some ongoing controversy
> about the legitimacy of Raw files or its practice.
>
> There is NO Raw file controversy
> in the real world
> outside of today's HUG.
> Its the way photography is done by the vast majority of people;
> Even tiny point and shoots can't be sold any more without Raw capability.
>
> There is a Raw filter in Photoshop and Lightroom so the file can be opened
> in a whole much better interface than a Tiff, psd, jpg, or others.
> Opening a shot in this way with a raw filter is like starting from scratch
> on the whole shooting of the picture. You can decide which light
> temperature
> to use; and most other variables. Even exposure though if you over expose
> you're still in trouble.
>
> One person on the Hasselblad users groups seems to have never heard of it
> and its a tidal wave of posts all thing to explain it to him.
> It involves practice. Not theory.
> That's the problem.
>
>
> Mark William Rabiner
>
>
>
> > From: Bob Adler <rgacpa@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Reply-To: "hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
> > To: "hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: [HUG ] Re: IMG: Triptych
> >
> >
> > Thank you Stefano.
> > They were saved as TIFF as they were scanned before Vuescan had the raw
> > capability.
> > I'm looking forward to hanging it on the wall.
> > Best,
> > Bob
> >
> > On Mar 17, 2009, at 8:25 PM, Stefano Kovacs <stefanok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > P.P.S. Bob, I meant to make the same suggestion about colour
> matching in
> > the
> > three  panels. The triptych looks very nice and I am sure that
> it is great
> > in
> > print, irrespective of the format of your scans...
> >
> >
> > On 18 Mar 2009, at 02:03, Jim Brick wrote:
> >
> > One thing, LR2 deals with DNG differently than TIFF. This isn't saying
> > that
> > you cannot do exactly the same with both, but, for instance, LR
> color temp
> > slider gives the 'color temperature value' (in Kelvin) for RAW and DNG.
> > And if
> > you have a photograph taken via tungsten, the slider will be way to the
> > left
> > and tell you that it is, say, 2850K. but for a TIFF, it just gives the
> > slider
> > set at zero (the middle) and you adjust + or -. There are other
> > differences as
> > well but this one is easy to explain. I personally like the actual
> > temperature
> > being given including that the slider is positioned
> analogically where it
> > is
> > supposed to be, on the scale from 2000 to 50,000. I know, I'm
> simple and
> > easy
> > to please, but when my scans operate within LR or PS in exactly the same
> > manner as camera RAW files, I like that!
> >
> > I have a 6x6 tranny that I scanned, on the same scanner, as a
> TIFF and as
> > a
> > DNG. The DNG wins! To LR, it is the same as a RAW file from a
> camera. You
> > really don't know that you are working with a scan since
> everything works
> > the
> > same. I like it (I guess you can tell...)!
> >
> > Now, on the Imacon, the RAW file is a .fff file, but written in TIFF
> > format so
> > that programs other than 'FlexColor' can read them. So other than with
> > Photoshop, you have to change the file extension from .fff to
> .tif.  But
> > as I
> > said earlier, it is really obvious that it is a raw file! Ugly!!!
> >
> > JMHO,
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> > On Mar 17, 2009, at 7:25 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jim,
> >
> > I don't know what Vuescan does to the .tiff files it saves
> (when they call
> > them "raw", I would hope nothing, but perhaps not?)...but there is
> > absolutely no reason that a .tiff file can not contain the
> exact raw image
> > as captured from the scanner A/D, with no processing (except for
> > calibration
> > similar to PRNU in the digicams).  In fact, the Leafscan saves
> "raw" data
> > as
> > 16 bit .tiffs, which are called "HDR" (High Dynamic Range,
> since they are
> > 16
> > bit/pixel).  But, IME, there is really no need to do that if
> you get your
> > setpoints and tonal curves right in the first place.
> >
> > I don't see the need for a special ".dng" format, when a .tiff
> can support
> > exactly the same thing...except to sell a "pro" version of Vuescan...
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Austin
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: hasselblad-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:hasselblad-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Jim Brick
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:54 PM
> > To: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [HUG ] Re: IMG: Triptych
> >
> >
> > To get a RAW file from a scanner using Vue Scan, you have to buy the
> > pro version of Vue Scan, then select that the file be written as a DNG
> > (Digital NeGative) which tells Vue Scan to ignore all of the Vue Scan
> > pre-sets and just write the 'raw' scanner data to the file. This is a
> > true raw file in DNG format. It's purpose is actually for re-scanning
> > the same image but without putting the film into the scanner. You scan
> > the DNG file, which comes into Vue Scan as if it came from the
> > scanner, with Vue Scan pre-sets set to the way you want them, and then
> > get a TIFF or JPEG, or whatever, with the changes that you want. This
> > presumes that you use Vue Scan as your image processor.
> >
> > So... Vue Scan DNG is truly RAW scanner data! No firmware or software
> > tweaks, only the gathering of the bits and putting them into a file in
> > DNG format.
> >
> > For me, it's much easier to get the picture that you want via LR or PS
> > rather than trying learn all of the nuances of a scanner program. I'll
> > take my digital images RAW!
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> > On Mar 17, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:
> >
> > Hi Franc,
> >
> > But...as both Marc and I pointed out, there is no such thing as a
> > standardized "raw" file format, but as I've pointed out, they can be
> > saved
> > as TIFFs. And, taking you up on your suggestion, what it appears
> > from the
> > Vuescan's manual, is that it saves these "raw" files with a .tif
> > extension:
> >
> > "? In the Output tab un-check all the options except for Output >
> > Raw file
> > As each image is scanned, files with sequential numbering such as
> > scan0001.tif,
> > scan0002.tif, etc. will be created."
> >
> > "To re-process these raw files:
> > ? Set the Input > Source option to File, and set Input > Files to
> > point to
> > the starting file
> > in the series (eg scan0001.tif)"
> >
> > So, at least with Vuescan, these "raw" files are saved as TIFFs, and
> > there
> > is, obviously, no loss of data with these TIFF files.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Austin
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: hasselblad-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:hasselblad-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Franc Flipsen
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:10 PM
> > To: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [HUG ] Re: IMG: Triptych
> >
> >
> >
> > I have a epson V700 and a minolta scan multi II and they both save
> > in raw
> > format using Viewscan and infact you can save as raw from any
> > scanner with
> > viewscan, Maybe you should check it out at www.hamrick.com .
> > I've also used
> > it with a polaroid sprintscan 45.  I can get a 48bit multi-pass
> > scan from
> > all of these scanners.  Of course they need to be saved as raw
> > files or you
> > loose information in conversion to a tiff file format.
> >
> > Franc
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Austin Franklin" <austin.franklin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:48 PM
> > Subject: [HUG ] Re: IMG: Triptych
> >
> >
> > Hi Franc,
> >
> > I think the point he is trying to make is that when you scan or
> > capture if
> > you save it in Raw you get what the sensor saw at the time and if
> > you save
> > it to a tiff, dng or some other format you discard some of the
> > data.
> >
> > Sure, but that is not true with TIFF when talking about a
> > scanner, which
> > is
> > what I was questioning.
> >
> > tiff
> > is a lossless format when opened but some of the data (not
> > needed by the
> > tiff file format)is stipped off the file before it is saved
> >
> > Like what data?  If any data is "stripped" that is implementation
> > dependant.
> > I have a few scanners that save TIFF, and that is THE raw data
> > format for
> > these scanners.  These TIFFs are typically called "HDR" for High
> > Dynamic
> > Range.  IOW, they have no setpoints or tonal curves
> > applied...so the image
> > you see if you were to open the file up in, say, PS, will be
> > typically
> > very
> > dark...until you apply setpoints and tonal curves to "normalize" it.
> >
> > ...so
> > the tiff file
> > does not contain all the data the sensor saw but a raw file does
> > contain all
> > the data the sensor saw and nothing else, not even a color
> > space profile.
> >
> > Well, that's not necessarily true.  At least with the scanners I've
> > designed
> > and the ones I have.  To save a "raw" file with any of my
> > scanners, you
> > save
> > it as a TIFF file, with no setpoints or tonal curves set.  TIFF
> > does not
> > define a "color space profile".
> >
> > What scanner do you have that saves files as "raw" and it's not
> > HDR or
> > TIFF?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Austin
> >
> >
> >
> > ==================================================================
> > ===========================================
> > To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and
> > logon to your
> > account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
> > subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
> >
> >
> >
> > ==================================================================
> > ===========================================
> > To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon
> > to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up
> > when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > =
> > ======================================================================
> > To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to
> > your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when
> > you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
> >
> >
> >
> > ====================================To unsubscribe from this
> > list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same
> > e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and
> > unsubscribe from there.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ==================================================================
> ============
> > ===============================
> > To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
> > account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
> > subscribed,)
> > and unsubscribe from there.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ==================================================================
> ============
> > ==============================To unsubscribe from this list, go to
> > www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and
> > password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ==================================================================
> ============
> > ==============================To unsubscribe from this list, go to
> > www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and
> > password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ==================================================================
> ============
> > ==============================To unsubscribe from this list, go to
> > www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and
> > password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>
>
>
> ====================================To unsubscribe from this list, go to
> www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and
> password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>
>
> ==================================================================
> ===========================================
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon
> to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up
> when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>
>


=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your 
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) 
and unsubscribe from there.

Other related posts: