Rescued by RAW

[george013]

Interesting. one of the sources that is widely cited is lclevy. He (she?) wrote that the NEF format includes a full-size lossy JPEG and that the CR2 includes a number of JPEGs. See http://lclevy.free.fr/nef/ and http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2/. that is rather puzzling given the comments by the tech representatives from Canon and Nikon.

what seems to be clear is that there is no high-quality full size embedded image.

I find I am handicapped by not understanding enough of the technical terminology in the documentation I have found.

Well, it includes a full size anyway, doesn't it?
Give IView a try, install the extra stuff too otherwise it can't read the raw. Play with it and think about it.
Shoot a picture in raw and jpg, view them both and see if you can see any difference. Both are made with the same in camera converter.That's all I can advise.

George

[xpatUSA]

Give IView a try, install the extra stuff too otherwise it can't read the raw.

What is IView? Is there a link?

[george013]

What is IView? Is there a link?

IrfanView. https://www.irfanview.com/
If you want tu use/try it download the plugins too. But as I mentioned, there're other browsers too based on the Exiftools.

George

[xpatUSA]

IrfanView. https://www.irfanview.com/
If you want tu use/try it download the plugins too. But as I mentioned, there're other browsers too based on the Exiftools.

George

Oh, I already have that, thanks. Just didn't understand your shortened name for it; must be getting old ...

[dje]

I was using a Canon EOS 80D, ISO 160 and f10, with -3 EV compensations !!! The lens was the EF L 70-300 IS USM.

Shooting at ISO 160 on an 80D with -3EV and then bringing that up in post is much the same as shooting at ISO 1280 (160 x 2^3) with no EC. With the higher ISO setting, the sensor is still under-exposed by 3EV but this is brought up in camera with analogue amplification.

As for jpegs embedded in RAW files, I've found that they can vary from thumbnail to full size depending on the camera make and model. They can be extracted using EXIFTool as George says.

Dave

[george013]

Shooting at ISO 160 on an 80D with -3EV and then bringing that up in post is much the same as shooting at ISO 1280 (160 x 2^3) with no EC. With the higher ISO setting, the sensor is still under-exposed by 3EV but this is brought up in camera with analogue amplification.

As for jpegs embedded in RAW files, I've found that they can vary from thumbnail to full size depending on the camera make and model. They can be extracted using EXIFTool as George says.

Dave

When back home I'll take 2 pictures, 1 well exposed and 1 -3 underexposed. And see what I can make of it. With my "skills".

In the good old days of Nikon CaptureNx2 you had only one file to take care of. It included the camera settings, the raw data and a full size low quality jpg. After editing an editor list was added and the low quality jpg was replaced with a high quality jpg. Everything in just one file. And the possibility of more then one edit but only a jpg of the last edited one. Using a browser as IrfanView I was able to save the jpg to disk. Now I'm stuck with a raw-file, a sidecar file being the editor list and a jpg file.

Anyway, the use of saving an extra jpg on the camera for a first view isn't necessary. For Nikon and for Canon. I don't know about other brands. It's easy to find out. Use a raw file in IrfanView.

George

[george013]

Interesting. one of the sources that is widely cited is lclevy. He (she?) wrote that the NEF format includes a full-size lossy JPEG and that the CR2 includes a number of JPEGs. See http://lclevy.free.fr/nef/ and http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2/. that is rather puzzling given the comments by the tech representatives from Canon and Nikon.

what seems to be clear is that there is no high-quality full size embedded image.

I find I am handicapped by not understanding enough of the technical terminology in the documentation I have found.

In another thread, The effect of Exposure stacking on bug shots, you mentioned you have IrfanView on your pc. Maybe I'm missing something but what is so difficult to open one of your raw images in IrfanView and let us know what you see? That would help a lot of people here. Please don't let it have an open end again.

George

[DanK]

it opens a full-size image, but I have no idea whether it is extracting a JPEG or rendering the raw file.

[george013]

it opens a full-size image, but I have no idea whether it is extracting a JPEG or rendering the raw file.

Off course you've an idea. It doesn't convert the raw image in much less then a second and giving exact the result as the jpg from the camera. Adobe would be very very jealous.

And did you compare a raw and a jpg, same picture but directly out of the camera?
And did you try to extract the jpg from the raw using exiftools? That would give you the definite answer.

Going back to the original item, saving an extra jpg is double up and double the effort when only used for the preview.

George.

[DanK]

Off course you've an idea. It doesn't convert the raw image in much less then a second and giving exact the result as the jpg from the camera. Adobe would be very very jealous.

And did you compare a raw and a jpg, same picture but directly out of the camera?
And did you try to extract the jpg from the raw using exiftools? That would give you the definite answer.

Going back to the original item, saving an extra jpg is double up and double the effort when only used for the preview.

George.

George,

I don't have a particular interest in pursuing this further. I learned from this thread that there is a low-res JPEG embedded in the raw file, which is interesting but has no practical importance for my work at all. So I am not going to take the time to compare images or to install exiftools. If others would like to, I'd be interested to see what they find, but I am not concerned about it.

Dan

PS: I know it is hard in a second language, but you need to be careful not to use antagonistic wording. For example:

Maybe I'm missing something but what is so difficult to open one of your raw images in IrfanView

"What's so difficult to..." is used to imply that someone didn't do something that they should have. And more so:

Off course you've an idea.

No, I had no idea at all. I hadn't thought about the implications of timing. An uncombative way to say this would have been something like this:

"Irfanview renders the image very quickly. That would seem to imply that it is reading JPEG and not converting a raw file."