[LRflex] Re: RAW vs JPEG (was More from Alaska) - slightly OT
- From: jerry harwood <jerry.harwood@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 19:22:04 +0100
Alex; regarding Nikons and RAW- I use a Digilux 2, and a D70; NEF (
Nikon Electronic Format) is OK to use, and once you have tried it a
couple of times is fairly straight forward. What you must do, is to set
your image size that you are going to print to, FIRST, otherwise you
will end up in total frustration like I did, until I set the size
first, in the little box to the right of the image screen. Another tip,
is to open up all the boxes so that you can see what you have got, and
then eliminate those that you don't need. All you have to do is to drag
and drop the image onto the Nikon capture screen, and it will open very
quickly. As to using the RAW mode with the Digilux 2, I just don't
bother ! But, expect to get ENORMOUS file sizes from the Nikon- a 10X8
print will finish up as a 90 MB file, so be warned ! regards Jerry
harwood.
On 5 Jul 2006, at 23:13, Alex Hurst wrote:
> Elliot wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the great tutoring !!
>
>
> I concur, having just succumbed to a Nikon D200 body myself on the
> basis that it'll mount almost all of my many MF Nikkors (wildly OT).
> DY makes the pros of RAW a lot clearer.
>
>> Still means that there must be computer
>> time with Photoshop or another program...I haven't tried RAW on the
>> Nikon
>> yet. As you probably know, their RAW files are some sort of
>> proprietary NEF
>> files. I know such files can be opened in Nikon Capture and other
>> programs
>> that can deal with NEF. One then transfer the files into Photoshop.
>> One
>> must be a computer wizard to do certain digital work!
>>
>
> For those seeking ultimate quality, the RAW route certainly makes a
> lot of sense at the cost of a considerable amount of extra work.
> OTOH, if your camera can produce a perfectly good 10Mb JPEG, it's
> unlikely that you'll see much difference in quality up to the size of
> an A4 print, which is my printer maximum anyway. And for publishing
> on the Net at 90 dpi, I doubt you could tell the difference between a
> large JPEG and RAW.
>
> It also means that I can import directly into iPhoto (Mac), and make
> any necessary adjustments in PS - which you can tell iPhoto is your
> program of choice. There's a lot to be said for working with just a
> couple of programs you know backwards. I've just started on the task
> of processing 300 shots from a IIIf and a Nikon F4 from my recent
> trip to Italy. My semi-digital compromise of telling my processor
> 'dev and CD' has made this a lot quicker and a great deal easier.
> Anything really outstanding, I will, of course, scan from the neg.
>
> Best
>
> Alex
> --
> Alex & Carmel Hurst
> Waterfall
> Near Cork
> Ireland
>
> Tel: +353 21 454 3328
> Mobile: +353 87 245 7048
> Work: +353 21 427 0907
> email: corkflor@xxxxxx
> Home Pages: http://www.iol.ie/~corkflor
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
