answers: 132

  1. Alexey
    06.04.2014

    Good day! My question is, does using raw significantly reduce battery life? In theory, the file is processed longer, the percent spends more energy. Thanks.

    Reply

    • borisych
      07.11.2014

      rav processing - the image is collected point by point from each pixel and formed by the processor with the camera settings and the set parameters is entered on the memory card, for example, a 15m file
      processing jeep file is formed according to the above path, only the processor 15 meg rava additionally clamps up to 5-8 meg
      therefore, it takes less time to form a ravah than a jeep, the speed depends on the camera buffer and the recording speed of the memory card, and accordingly the camera’s battery consumption depends on the same conditions

      Reply

  2. Artyom
    29.04.2014

    Good day)
    Tell me, otherwise I’m going to tear my hair on my head ... soon I’ll tear my head, which damn converter is better for NEF (RAW) ...
    Already tired of hiccupping….

    Reply

    • Artyom
      29.04.2014

      Perhaps my hands are not from there, but the camera is not working in the photozhop ... ((

      Reply

      • Vladimir
        08.08.2014

        Artyom, the last lightroom is on friendly terms with nef

        Reply

    • zenzoomzen
      06.05.2014

      It depends on what it is better for ... Kepchur NX2 has practically no options if good color is important, the snare 6 still gives nothing in the color of the picture from the naves after a little dance. If speed is important and the color is not particularly worn out, or drug-addicted toning is needed, then the camera is equal (it's lightroom). For perverts I recommend Raw Therapee 4))) try it, just for fun, just at least, there are a bunch of all sorts of settings, twists, pens, whistle-making ..., by the way, a free program initially, open source, plows on Linux.

      Reply

  3. Alexey
    21.05.2014

    Arkady, answer please: here, for example, in the D3200, D7100 and probably in others there is a more or less developed intra-chamber processing of RAW - at least BB (fine-tuned), exposure +/- 2, PictureControl with settings well and little things- d-lightning and others. In your opinion, if the quality of each photo is important, and there is no time to work in editors, for example, how complete is an adequate RAW / 14 / lossless shooting with subsequent compression / post-processing inside the camera? It seems to me that this method (again, given the importance of the material) is a good alternative to shooting a report in JPEG with operational adjustment of parameters, bracketing, etc. A ?

    Reply

    • Vodichkin
      10.12.2015

      So it’s like PictureControl, D-lighting and all that will only affect JPEG, and with RAW only through NX2.

      Reply

      • Alexey
        11.12.2015

        check lightroom and adobe. like they, too, open to you Nikon's RAV, taking into account the settings in the pikcher control. perhaps other editors take it into account when developing RAV.
        I don’t remember how on Nikon, on Kenon, the priority of lights is applied before recording in RAV, i.e. affects both RAV and cam jpeg.

        Reply

  4. Leonid
    23.05.2014

    After processing in the RAF camera, the file is saved in zhp. The image quality after processing in the RAF is preserved or not. Or you need to save in the RAF. Then how to print or post on the network or elsewhere

    Reply

    • Alexey
      30.05.2014

      Well, actually, the results of the intra-chamber look good, besides, there is an opportunity to "get" finally on the BB, exposure and stop. ZHPG is also an ogogo format, the question is, when translating rav-zhpg, be able to make adjustments?

      Reply

  5. Vladimir
    22.11.2014

    Forbid to ask a question, maybe off topic.
    Why are shooting parameters not reflected in the “properties” of RAW files, but all this is in the “properties” of JPG files? (I mean shutter speed, aperture, ISO, etc.)
    If the question is clear and not difficult to answer, please someone explain.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      22.11.2014

      Rather, the problem is that you are using software that does not display EXIF ​​in RAW files.

      Reply

      • Vladimir
        22.11.2014

        I'm not good at software…. I have Windows XP. I drop RAW files directly to the “desktop” and here I try to see the parameters of the images. What software do you think I need?

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        22.11.2014

        For example, a native that came with the camera.

        Reply

      • Vladimir
        23.11.2014

        Many thanks. Then you have to learn English.

        Reply

  6. anonym
    13.12.2014

    For me, the RAW or JPG question was only a few days, while comparing. I decided to shoot everything in RAW + JPG. In this case, there is no need to process all the pictures in the editor. I process only what is necessary. For several years I have been using ACDSee Pro to process CR2 files.

    Reply

  7. Anatoly
    12.03.2015

    I was just starting out and didn't really know how to shoot - I shot in RAW (so that later on my computer to edit the photo)
    Then, as I mastered the camera and learned how to shoot, my qualifications increased and I shoot ntgthm in Jpeg.
    On any monitor, the quality of colors still cannot be distinguished - and even more so for printing in 10 by 15 format.
    Colors in editors are corrected the same as in RAW and in JPEG.
    Here are the problems of the lens (distortion, HA) - yes, you can correct it only being in RAW (you can certainly correct the lens correction in JPEG, but not as easy as RAW in specialized programs) ..
    Therefore, a wide angle can be shot in RAW, if you need very healthy correctness and then bother less with the problems of space curvature by the lens, and medium and large FDs - in jpeg.

    Reply

  8. BB
    20.07.2015

    "I simply won't notice the difference ..."
    - mind you - with a soft sign.

    Reply

  9. Hleb
    01.08.2015

    I stopped shooting raw a long time ago. I get everything I need in jpeg. Shooting raw in the hope of getting it out / fixing is a losing track. (You can get a lot out of jpeg if necessary.) If I need a wide dynamic range, I use hdr, for everything else, jpeg is fine. I'm not a fan of post-processing, so I took off / gave / showed the best option for me.

    Reply

  10. Ruslan R.
    01.08.2015

    And I shoot in nef + jpg. And I develop ALL photos in lightroom. And jpg on the second card as a backup copy in case of failure of the main card ... It would be possible to write there in nef, but the write speed on sd is still less than on compactflash, and I don't need brakes during shooting ... Many do not like to mess around with ravki, but on the contrary, I like it ... When from a dull photograph you do what you think is necessary, and not what the camera automatics imposes on you ... Maybe I'm wrong, but I will do the same, because I like it so much :-P

    Reply

  11. Yarkiya
    01.08.2015

    I don’t even want to comment. To buy serious equipment, then to shoot in a jeep, well, shoot with iPhones, what’s there, no RAW solid jeep.

    And RAW is needed not to pull the shit-shots (although for this too), but for creative space.

    Reply

    • Lynx
      01.08.2015

      Well, I mostly shoot in a jeep.
      under most of my tasks it is more than enough.

      Reply

  12. Yarkiya
    02.08.2015

    Lynx, no question, you can shoot even in BMP if possible. I am against the statements of “masters” who consider on-camera JPEG to be the pinnacle of mastery, who do not know what RAW is and do not understand what to do with it.

    I also sometimes use JPEG when I shoot for someone. I put RAW + JPEG of the lowest quality just for demonstration, and if I like, I process the original from RAW.

    Reply

    • Lynx
      02.08.2015

      We drag then no statements that the "jeep is the pinnacle of skill" I do not see in it.
      Actually, people who feel that “real professionals always shoot in equal terms, so if you shoot in equal terms, then a real pro” annoy no less.
      If a person gets a quality that suits him and the customers in a jeep - why not?

      Reply

  13. Karina
    02.09.2015

    Maybe someone will come in handy ... I know a free online service for converting various RAW photos to JPG, BMP or TIFF without losing quality: http://www.imgonline.com.ua/convert.php

    Reply

  14. anonym
    04.09.2015

    Hello. I rent it myself in a rabbi and am satisfied))
    I asked myself this question, when the noise suppression functions and the like (which are designed to improve the quality of the photo) are turned on, the camera can sometimes “think” longer. As I understand it, all this is important for JPG, but it does not affect it in any way. That is, if you turn them off, the camera will "slow down" less.
    I’m interested in your opinion, maybe I misunderstood something.

    Reply

    • Lynx
      04.09.2015

      dragging it, the rabbi is an order of magnitude heavier than the jeep, so the camera in the rabbi in any case slows down more, due to the recording of frames. (This is, roughly speaking)

      Reply

    • Artem
      20.02.2017

      High noise suppression slows down because the camera takes two pictures and subtracts the noise based on the difference for a clean LPG. Therefore, if you shoot in Po, then turn off all improvers.
      The rest of the Lynx is right many of the brakes due to the record.

      Reply

  15. Paul
    19.01.2016

    Hello.
    Such a question for connoisseurs - can a raw (nef) file be reduced from 16,1 megapixels to 15? The option to translate to jpeg and crop to 15MP is not an option.
    Thank you.
    PS since I rarely appear on the forum, please, who knows, unsubscribe by mail: sidopas@gmail.com

    Reply

  16. anonym
    25.12.2016

    Thank you. Clear, simple explanation

    Reply

  17. anonym
    20.02.2017

    notice

    Reply

  18. Konstantin
    20.03.2017

    good evening, such a question? I shoot mostly in JPEG, tried it in RAW, after importing into the lightroom, the raw files are all not sharp enough, I would even say soapy ones, and jpeg are razor sharp, although it should be the other way around, I can’t understand the reason.

    Reply

    • Peter Sh.
      21.03.2017

      For me, by default for RAW, the lightroom turns on noise reduction. Check, maybe that's why.
      In general, if you don’t have something extreme, strong color noise, for example, to convert RAW, it is always preferable to use native programs.

      Reply

    • Jury
      21.03.2017

      In this article https://radojuva.com/2016/05/ultra-combo-sharp-nikon/ Arkady spoke well about sharpness for Nikon's jpeg. Lightroom does not see the sharpness settings that are set in the camera (since it is a non-native editor), so the sharpness values ​​must be set manually during photo processing. Initially, in Lightroom, the sharpness values ​​are not set, so the photos are different, jpeg - with camera processing, and a photo in Lightroom - without processing

      Reply

  19. Konstantin
    21.03.2017

    Thanks to those who responded, the sharpness slider at maximum does not save the situation for rav files, I will download my native Nikon program and try to turn off noise reduction. Thanks Radozhive.

    Reply

    • Denis
      21.03.2017

      Noises in the camera turned on or off on Nikon's RAW do not work

      Reply

  20. Konstantin
    24.03.2017

    I have noise suppressors in the camera and everything is turned off by default, but I won’t figure out how to turn them off in the lightroom.

    Reply

  21. Andrey
    30.03.2017

    A couple of years ago, I asked this question and then decided for myself that I can pull more out of the Republic of Lithuania than that better option in Jpeg.
    Now I decided to reconsider my decision with fresh experience and knowledge. And I just can’t get a definite answer. With different photographs, often very different results are obtained. I don’t want to troll with photos, but without them it's just words.
    It's cool when they argue only in words without providing any examples. In general, it is difficult to conduct a reliable experiment, because too many variables. A little change somewhere the step and the result changes. Maybe I'll write when I come to a final decision;)

    Reply

  22. Vasya
    01.09.2017

    You can shoot in jpeg + raw at the same time!

    Reply

  23. Ann
    01.12.2017

    Hello. For some reason, on my rav files, pixels are visible after I open it through the lightroom. What could be the problem

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      01.12.2017

      Describe what exactly you mean by “pixels”. All readers also see pixels, many pixels!
      And the reason is always the same - LR is a third-party software for processing photographs, it needs to be adjusted for each picture and for each camera settings.

      Reply

  24. anonym
    08.03.2018

    I’m processing the pictures in the lightroom, a year later I realized what a flexible format the nave is, that you can squeeze it out for better image quality, no increase in noise is seen. Also, I couldn’t cope with the color of the raw nave file before, but this problem was resolved over time by changing the settings in camera profile editor, the default is in adobe standart.

    Reply

  25. Grigory Smirnov
    12.12.2018

    Hello. Question. It is clear that for the RAV it is necessary to set the balance in the CAMERA, manually or by auto, by itself plays the role of sensitivity, aperture, shutter speed. And the parameters of sharpness and contrast - is there any point in changing them? I asked a dozen photographers, looked at the sites, there is no complete clarity, as a rule they say that for RAV there is no difference in the setting of sharpness and contrast, but - they are not sure, it seems, - they write so. Andrey, and what can affect the quality of the RAV when changing the settings in the CAMERA? I hope for your answer. Best regards, Gregory.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      12.12.2018

      If you use native programs for conversion, you should adjust the picture control or image style to your liking. Native software understands the settings. Third-party converters do not always understand, so you can not configure. Also, third-party converters do not understand some improvers like Nikon's ADL, when it is turned on, third-party converters can display just a terrible picture. It would be nice if you specify for which camera you are looking for the answer.

      Reply

      • Grigory Smirnov
        12.12.2018

        Thank you, Arkady. Camera NIKON D7100. I work at ACDSee-9, less often at FSH. Which converter do you think is optimal for this camera? And what kind of "enhancers" are they recommended?

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        12.12.2018

        It is best to use the native converters Nikon ViewNX-i, Nikon Capture NX-i, NX-D. Improvers: ADL, noise reduction, vignetting correction, distortion correction

        Reply

      • Grigory Smirnov
        13.12.2018

        Thank you.

        Reply

  26. Load more comments ...

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer