Raw v sRaw

[Slough]

Not sure I agree that the difference is huge given that we are viewing a 21MP image at 100%. But maybe best not to get into a "Oh yes it is. Oh no No it isn't" discussion.

I guess this demonstrates that digital can often be used to make huge prints from modest files, typically when there is not much fine detail, due to the absence of grain.

[KevinA]

Kevin,

1. your samples prove, that the difference between the upresed sRaw and the full raw is huge.

2. draw a small matrix of raw pixels and envision what is happening.

a. In the full raw image, each pixel carries one component of the "final" color, The other two components have to be "created", calculated from the neighbours. This is an educated guess.

b. In the sRaw image the pixels of different colors are "integrated". You have read the term "subsampling", but that's incorrect; there is no subsampling here, because there is nothing to subsample from. Anyway, now you have tri-color pixels, but they are "farther apart".

c. When you are upresing the sRaw, the interpolation, whatever method you select, is creating new pixels; this too is guessing. However, this is a "lesser educated guess" than the demosaicing was, because

I. the demosaicing needs to guess only two of the three colors for each pixel,

II. that pixels serving as basis for the guessing are closer to each other.

Therefor you can not get the same resolution with upsampling the sRaw; but that's all right, for that is not the purpose of sRaw.

Just curious which one is which of the wall and wood shot?

Kevin.

[Panopeeper]

Just curious which one is which of the wall and wood shot?

The first of both pairs contain finer details.

Btw, why do you create JPEGs with ProPhoto RGB?