Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 5/23/05 4:05 AM, "Tina Manley" <images@infoave.net> typed: > At 02:06 AM 5/23/2005, you wrote: >> Tina: As I understand it, a 16-bit TIFF file contains pretty much the >> same information as the RAW file. >> >> --Peter > > No. There is a big difference between Tiff and Raw files. The Tiff has > been converted and decisions have to be made when the file is converted > from RAW. Especially with the newest version of Photoshop, you have the > ability to correct chromatic fringing, lens distortion, vignetting, > temperature, exposure, sharpness, noise, and a lot more. The Raw file > contains every bit of possible information. When it is converted, even to > a 16 bit Tiff, bits of information are discarded and cannot be covered in > the converted form. If you try to do some of the adjustments that are > possible on a Raw file with the Tiff file in Photoshop, you will end up > with combed histograms and posterized and banded prints. There are lots of > web sites and the Bruce Fraser book that explain all of this, but I didn't > just read it all, I tried it with lots of different files, working in Raw > and with jpegs and Tiffs. Raw gives you by far the most flexibility. I > save Tiffs, too, when I get a photo adjusted just the way I want to print > it, but I also save the Raw. My Raw files that I saved before the newest > version of Photoshop can still be converted taking advantage of all of the > new capabilities of the CS2 software. If I only had saved the Tiffs, I > wouldn't be able to do that. > > Tina > > > Tina Manley, ASMP > www.tinamanley.com > > > I think Raw files are much smaller than tiffs. Especially 16bit tiffs. Mark Rabiner Photography Portland Oregon http://rabinergroup.com/