Astroandre [2014-11-17 20:53:00 +0000 UTC]

Well, I guess the answer (at least for me) is NEF + JPG fine. Right after copying to the computer, the RAWs are safely stored away. 90% Of my work is then done using the JPGs and only if I decide to go HDR, tonemap or have to change the white balance, I dig out the RAW and use that.
That technique uses more space, but space (SD and HDD) is so cheap, that it does not really matter.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ExplicitStudios [2014-11-11 02:46:11 +0000 UTC]

thank you guys so much for the feature!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Peeshan [2014-11-06 15:05:10 +0000 UTC]

I think you should make a entry/comparison about Raw converters softwares as the logical follow-up - personnally I recently switched from rawtherapee to nikon's own capture NX-D and I found some important quality improvements in the converted file (although capture nx has way less features and possibilities of experimentation) . I don't know about Lightroom but I guess people would want an opinion about it too. As for editor plug-ins, in my experience they are a waste of time.

Also, it could be useful to mention the RAW+JPG feature of nikon's cameras

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SerenataPhotography [2014-11-02 19:37:14 +0000 UTC]

Thank you  so much for the feature Always .RAW

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

feebonacci [2014-11-02 11:04:12 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for the feature! ! and RAW is the answer for me  

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

OSMiUMimages [2014-11-02 03:38:28 +0000 UTC]

You've correctly pointed out that .tiff files are typically 24-bits per pixel, 8-bits per red, blue and green channel. However you've fundamentally misunderstood how a 14-bit .nef works in comparison.

A .nef file contains typically 14-bits per pixel, however a raw pixel is only one of ether red, blue or green. During the process of opening a .nef for editing, software will estimate and fill-in the 2 missing colours to render a complete image. As a result the .nef image for editing is actually 42-bits per pixel.  In a 24-bit .tiff this estimation and filling processes is done by the camera's firmware, then the image is down sampled from 42-bits to 24-bits. The contrast in the .tiff is typically quite low as you mentioned, this is done in an attempt to reduce the likelihood of clipping the highlights and shadows while trying to use the 24-bits as efficiently as possible. A .tiff is much better than a .jpeg for editing, but pales in comparison to a .nef, there are only a few rare situations where anybody would specifically need a .tiff file from their camera, that's why the option only appears on Nikon's professional line of cameras.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1