Hi guys, I am new to RAW and had a question about what the camera would output. On my D700 if I set a WB, exposure compensation, a picture style or even Active D lighting, will the RAW will be output the file with ALL the settings I have chosen or will it only apply certain settings to the RAW and only apply ALL to JPEGs?
and help to keep the site free for all
RAW and camera output
- Thread starter wazy15
- Start date
- Messages
- 560
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've not got a D700 so best to wait for someone who does to comment, and it also depends on what software you - Nikons software (Capture NX??) is different to Lightroom/Photoshop and more able to take all the cameras settings, although Lightroom has an "as shot" option for the White Balance for you to start with. Picture style is definetaly a jpg thing. Exposure Compensation (+/- EV) affects how long the shutter is open for, so the RAW will be different. I'm not sure about Active D and Raw - but it won't be doing anything you couldn't do in post anyway.
- Messages
- 4,289
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The answer to your question depends on which software you're using to post process. Only Nikon's own ViewNX2 or Capture NX2 will apply the in-camera settings to your RAW file - programmes like Photoshop, Lightroom, Elements, Picasa, at al may apply some settings based on "best guess" algorithms but other settings will be totally ignored.
The whole point of shooting RAW is that it gives you total control over the processing.
Hope that helps
TCR4x4
Wishes he had a couple more Inches
- Messages
- 8,849
- Name
- Tom
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The RAW file is just that, RAW. No processing whatsoever. Anything you've set in the camera is ignored. Unless like has been said, you use capture NX, which I believe adds all the settings to the RAWs on import, which you can then change.
I think Lightroom etc have the option to set the default picture styles if you want, but when you import, it will just be "as shot"
I think Lightroom etc have the option to set the default picture styles if you want, but when you import, it will just be "as shot"
- Messages
- 145
- Edit My Images
- No
Raw will apply all the settings on the image same as on JPG however RAW will be a file with richer information for postprocessing hope it helps
- Messages
- 250
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I use a D90 with Aperture & Lightroom on the Mac.
The RAW file is simply the 'digital negative'.. there's no fancy camera pre/post processing added. This information is held in a seperate 'Tag' if you like, which when read by CaptureNX applies those changes to the RAW file.. but again, they're only tagged so can be removed from the RAW (can't be removed from the JPEG, it physically changes the file attributes).
As a default with Aperture, cameras have 2 (possibly 3) tweaks made on RAW import.
The camera body is looked up in the Aperture Database and then settings are applied. My D90 for example has 35% sharpening, luminence and I think some saturation added as a import default.
All of this can be changed, removed either post or preimport..the options are under import settings.
The RAW file is simply the 'digital negative'.. there's no fancy camera pre/post processing added. This information is held in a seperate 'Tag' if you like, which when read by CaptureNX applies those changes to the RAW file.. but again, they're only tagged so can be removed from the RAW (can't be removed from the JPEG, it physically changes the file attributes).
As a default with Aperture, cameras have 2 (possibly 3) tweaks made on RAW import.
The camera body is looked up in the Aperture Database and then settings are applied. My D90 for example has 35% sharpening, luminence and I think some saturation added as a import default.
All of this can be changed, removed either post or preimport..the options are under import settings.
TCR4x4
Wishes he had a couple more Inches
- Messages
- 8,849
- Name
- Tom
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have a D700, I have Aperture. No JPG processing is applied to the RAW by Default. Mr Yannick is wrong.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
The principle is that the Raw is only affected by one thing - the exposure level. All the other processing parameters are applied after, and separately, either in camera or in post processing.
However, I have heard that some of the Canon in-camera settings - HTP, ALO etc - do affect the Raw file, albeit very slightly. This came from generally reliable sources on here, about the time the 50D was announced but TBH I'm skeptical. Tim Dodd is a man who would know for sure
BTW, the Raw is technically not the digital negative. It is better than that - it's the digital latent image before development by the Raw processor, like a roll of film before it goes into the dev tank. Therefore, not all processed Raws are the same, depending on the software used - not that there seems to be a great deal of difference between them, but the potential is there.
However, I have heard that some of the Canon in-camera settings - HTP, ALO etc - do affect the Raw file, albeit very slightly. This came from generally reliable sources on here, about the time the 50D was announced but TBH I'm skeptical. Tim Dodd is a man who would know for sure
BTW, the Raw is technically not the digital negative. It is better than that - it's the digital latent image before development by the Raw processor, like a roll of film before it goes into the dev tank. Therefore, not all processed Raws are the same, depending on the software used - not that there seems to be a great deal of difference between them, but the potential is there.
Thanks for the responses guys. I know assume fiddling with picture control and active d lighting is pointless with RAW files when shooting, can tinker with the effects manually in Aperture. I assume the white balance set on camera it retains in the RAW file?
TCR4x4
Wishes he had a couple more Inches
- Messages
- 8,849
- Name
- Tom
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not sure what it defaults too, usually "as shot" or AUTO on most programs. Of course you can change it to any setting in the RAW file.
- Messages
- 6,908
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Setting a picture style affects how the Histogram behaves, as you are seeing a Histogram for the processed Jpeg that would be generated from the in camera settings, not the RAW data, which is why I set a Neutral picture style for my camera. As far as I know there are no cameras which show a unprocessed Histogram. I'm prepared to be proved wrong on that tough.
There could be a benefit to shooting with a B&W picture style/mode though as you can review the image to see what the image will look like in B&W, which can aid in composition and scene visualisation. When you open your RAW file in your conversion program (manufacturers software aside) it will be colour as the picture style is not read, allowing you convert to B&W as you see fit. There are many ways to convert an image to B&W which are way beyond, and offer more control that your camera can offer you.
Even if it is the manufacturers software you would not be locked into the B&W picture style and could change it after the fact, unlike Jpeg were once the colour has gone, it's impossible to get back.
There could be a benefit to shooting with a B&W picture style/mode though as you can review the image to see what the image will look like in B&W, which can aid in composition and scene visualisation. When you open your RAW file in your conversion program (manufacturers software aside) it will be colour as the picture style is not read, allowing you convert to B&W as you see fit. There are many ways to convert an image to B&W which are way beyond, and offer more control that your camera can offer you.
Even if it is the manufacturers software you would not be locked into the B&W picture style and could change it after the fact, unlike Jpeg were once the colour has gone, it's impossible to get back.
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Even if you only shoot Raw, there are big benefits to taking a bit of care over the in-camera pre-sets.
Most importantly, since the histogram and blinkies are both generated off the JPEG tagged to the Raw files, any in-camera adjustments will affect them. In particular, the contrast setting makes a big difference and if you want to exposure to the right, then turning that down will allow you to push the exposure a lot more - like at least a stop - before it blows.
It's also handy to have as close a visual reference as possible on the LCD, and a lot of software picks up on those settings as a starting point for Raw processing.
Most importantly, since the histogram and blinkies are both generated off the JPEG tagged to the Raw files, any in-camera adjustments will affect them. In particular, the contrast setting makes a big difference and if you want to exposure to the right, then turning that down will allow you to push the exposure a lot more - like at least a stop - before it blows.
It's also handy to have as close a visual reference as possible on the LCD, and a lot of software picks up on those settings as a starting point for Raw processing.
- Messages
- 8
- Name
- Ian
- Edit My Images
- No
You need to work out what which controls afect the RAW data and which are just written to the files metadata section. Any adjustments that affect exposure are hard coded in the RAW data (exposure compensation for instance). White balance is recorded in the RAW metadata and interpreted by Lightroom/Aperture etc so can be changed during post processing if required. I believe Active-D lighting does change the RAW data as its just a form of expposure control. Picture controls etc are written to the metadata but ignored unless processed by Nikon software. Lightroom has presets/profiles to simulate them that can be applied but I don't know if Aperture does.
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks very much for that Ian.
So it looks like Nikon's Active D-Lighting (and Canon's equivalent Highlight Tone Priority) does indeed impact the Raw, because it is effectively a fundamental exposure adjustment and applies selective gain to different areas of the image.
Basically it cuts the ISO on very bright areas to pull down and hold the highlights, and is the reason why minimum ISO is reduced to give the camera scope to do that at all times. I guess it's a very mild form of HDR.
Does that sound right to you?
awp said:
That's correct, nikon don't give third parties their profiles. Raw data is just the light levels recorded at each photosite, everything else like white balance and sharpness and colour info is done by software. Third party software has profiles like standard and vivid etc. But they are just made up ones. They can't apply the in camera settings that would be applied if you shot jpg. As far as I know only white balance is applied if you don't use nikon software.
That's why the raw never looks the same as the jpg preview you see on the lcd even if you choose a setting like standard in lightroom or whatever.
My take is use X-rite colour passport system and create your own profiles as even 2 cameras of the same model will be slightly different. You can make profiles for different light conditions, flash, daylight etc. And use them even if you don't shoot the colour checker during the photo session and the colours will be so much better and save so much time in post that you will wonder how you ever got on without one.
Last edited:
wazy15 said:
Although you can adjust white balance of a jpg in LR its not the same as doing it with a RAW file. Do it with an image with way off white balance and mixed lighting and you will see what I mean.
There's lots of other benefits, noise reduction, sharpening etc. Isn't determined by the camera and you have at least a stop of latitude in the highlight exposure that you don't have with a jpg.
When you have time to set white balance and lighting is perfect and you have time to nail every exposure, then you might not always see a great benefit to shooting RAW. I don't see the point in spending a small fortune on high quality gear and software only to never take it out of first gear. Just my opinion if course and if you're happy with jpg that's fine too.
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
That's true. And IMHO the single best reason for shooting Raw. Good for Expose to the Right technique.
- Messages
- 6,908
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If the Jpegs work fine for you, then carry on.
However, with the Jpeg the pixels have already had the colour set when the WB and Picture Style was chosen, so any changes to the colour alter the pixels, and so possibly degrade them. With the RAW file, the WB, and so colour, isn't set until you save it as something else, and the Picture Styles also have no effect. That is why you can take the picture with a B&W picture style, and still have the colours in the RAW file.
The Sharpness, Contrast and Curves have also already been written into the image, so if you decide to sharpen again you're sharpening an image which as already been sharpened. Best to try and sharpen once, and at the end of all your editing if possible.
With any changes to Levels, Contrast and Curves you're working with an 8bit file when it's already a Jpeg, and so 255 tonal levels to work with. The RAW file is a 12bit file which has 4095 tonal levels to play with. There is scope for more subtle changes. It may still end up as a 8bit Jpeg, but you've been able to work on a file with more information beforehand.
Like I said, if Jpegs work for you, then fine, save the space on your memory cards and HDs, because that's important isn't it, the memory used? :shrug:
