From: avidgamefan (avidgamefan@yahoo.com)
Date: Sun May 25 2003 - 20:29:08 EDT
This looks too cool. Anyone try it yet? I don't know if I dare!
Besides, my camera (880) is one of the few that he didn't test
(although, I assume it would work the same as for the 990....).
--- In NikonCoolPix@yahoogroups.com, Andy Pastuszak
<andy_pastuszak@y...> wrote:
> The big thing for me would be how fast does it save?
> I have a CoolPix 995 and saving as a TIFF takes
> FOREVER.
Well, he said for a 2mp pic it was 2.8 Mbytes. A "fine" jpeg takes
about 3 seconds for my 880 to save, and that's just over a meg. A
TIFF is 9 Mbytes and takes 30 seconds. So, maybe it takes somewhere
in between? If I understand him correctly, it also saves a separate
jpeg as well. So, I'm not sure that this is a good option just on a
pure speed basis.
>If I could shoot a RAW image on the 995 that
> saves in the same time as a JPEG and then convert it
> to TIFF via software, I'd be happy.
>
> Are these the same RAW images that the pro line saves
> as NEF files, or is this a completely different
> format?
It's a different format. He has a link to another page to a
converter that puts it in (I assume) the NEF format?
> It would be nice to see Nikon put out an
> offical ROM update to support this format.
Yeah, but since they've had this capability and haven't bothered,
I'd say that chances are slim. (Besides, for those of us with older
cameras, like the 880, I'd be surprised if we got any firmware
upgrades beyond 1.1.)
> Andy
>
> --- " rich-d.ma.ultranet" <rich-d.ma.ultranet@r...>
> wrote:
....
> > sure..does shooting in raw mode give more than 8
> > bits of color depth with
> > the cp5k series of cameras? My guess is no...the
> > hardware is designed for 8
> > bits of depth...so other than minimal jpeg
> > artifacts(which has been
> > discussed to to death)... is there any advantage?
Why does this guy get 12 bit files out? Is it really 8 bit in the
camera and then just gets saved as 12? If the camera really isn't
capable of 12 bits, then I'd say that it's not worth fooling with
this mode.
If you just want to avoid artifacts, just use TIFF mode. I'm with
Andy-- the delay time between pics will kill you. With my larger
cards, at least I can reasonably get a few of them on there... But
it doesn't seem practical for "everyday" use.
> > You can work in a 12 bit
> > space for rework in some software is all I seem to
> > remember..but the basic
> > image captured only has 8 bits of depth..(i.e. 256
> > levels of any color)
> > correct?
256 of each color. Does photoshop convert up to 12 bits while
you're working on it? Probably not, but it might be helpful if it
did.
> > Got a wedding shoot in a few weeks and am
> > wondering if I shoot use
> > raw for any images....
> >
> > rich
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sam [mailto:miltech@e...]
> > Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 2:27 PM
> > To: NikonCoolPix@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [NikonCoolPix] Raw format on Coolpix
> >
> >
> > I have Raw mode on my Coolpix 5000 through the
> > updated firmware and it
> > works great for Macro photography where colour is
> > required, Bibble gives
> > me very Velvia like colors. I do have an 885 and
....
Is Velvia any good? :-) I find TIFF to give a slightly smoother
appearance, but particularly as I zoom into the details. I would
think that RAW would not be that much different in that respect.
About the only thing I can think of that raw would give me is the
ability to re-do the white balance and, if I actually had 10 or 12
bits of real data, adjust the contrast to fit into 8 bits.
I think the "deal-killer" here for me is that you can't turn this
mode off until you hook it up to the computer again and rerun the
utility (if I understand him correctly). At least I can easily turn
TIFF mode off!
Well, I just braved the flesh-eating deer flys to try to get some
pics of bumblebees having a nice feast in my backyard flowers. I
used TIFF mode, which meant that it took me forever, and I lost a
lot of light (and nearly some flesh). Anything for a good pic,
though, eh? Unfortunately, the darned things "jiggle" while they
eat, so even when I managed to get a good shot, it's usually a bit
blurred. They just won't cooperate! Anyway, I wanted to use TIFF,
because if you have to blow something up, it's going to look
better. I might have to crop a lot on these. Usually, JPEG is fine
for most things, though.
Gary
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/tcIolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
NikonCoolPix-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sun May 25 2003 - 20:29:22 EDT