Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: RAW Digger - Sony a7R IV RAW file - anyone checked the actual number color bits?  (Read 956 times)

Lust4Life

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 694
    • http://www.shadowsdancing.com

I've not found any posting on the ACTUAL number of color bits that the IV generates in RAW.
Want not just what Sony says, but what something like RAW Digger states.
Anyone compare this to our world of MF?

Jack
Logged
Jack

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15895
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

Best to simply email Illiah, he'll confirm ASAP, he's that kind of follow. I don't want to post his email publicly so if you don't have it, PM me.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

Lust4Life

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 694
    • http://www.shadowsdancing.com

Best to simply email Illiah, he'll confirm ASAP, he's that kind of follow. I don't want to post his email publicly so if you don't have it, PM me.

PM sent.  I have no idea who Illiah is.
Logged
Jack

degrub

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1178

i believe he had a little something to do with Raw Digger and related software. You can Search on his name in the LULA forums.
Logged

Lust4Life

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 694
    • http://www.shadowsdancing.com

I think my question may not be clear.

I am trying to learn about the Sony aR7 IV camera and does IT provide a true 16 bit RAW color file.

Logged
Jack

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15895
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

i believe he had a little something to do with Raw Digger and related software. You can Search on his name in the LULA forums.
He is the author of RD and FastRawViewer.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15895
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

I think my question may not be clear.

I am trying to learn about the Sony aR7 IV camera and does IT provide a true 16 bit RAW color file.
Probably not but Illiah knows.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

SrMi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 243

I've not found any posting on the ACTUAL number of color bits that the IV generates in RAW.
Want not just what Sony says, but what something like RAW Digger states.
Anyone compare this to our world of MF?

Jack

You are better off asking questions about a7rIV in the "Mirrorless  Cameras" instead of the "Medium Format/..." forum.
Sony's raw format support 12-bit and 14-bit formats. No change to the raw format has been announced.
Logged

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2247
    • The Last Word

You are better off asking questions about a7rIV in the "Mirrorless  Cameras" instead of the "Medium Format/..." forum.
Sony's raw format support 12-bit and 14-bit formats. No change to the raw format has been announced.

Craw is 13 bits near the origin, and less further up the tone curve.

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2247
    • The Last Word

I've not found any posting on the ACTUAL number of color bits that the IV generates in RAW.
Want not just what Sony says, but what something like RAW Digger states.

Here's an excerpt from the EXIF of an uncompressed raw shot:

File Type                       : ARW
File Type Extension             : arw
MIME Type                       : image/x-sony-arw
Exif Byte Order                 : Little-endian (Intel, II)
Image Description               :
Orientation                     : Horizontal (normal)
Image Width                     : 9600
Image Height                    : 6376
Bits Per Sample                 : 14
Compression                     : Uncompressed
Photometric Interpretation      : Color Filter Array
Samples Per Pixel               : 1
Planar Configuration            : Chunky
X Resolution                    : 350
Y Resolution                    : 350
Resolution Unit                 : inches
CFA Repeat Pattern Dim          : 2 2
CFA Pattern 2                   : 0 1 1 2
Sony Raw File Type              : Sony Uncompressed 14-bit RAW

Here's a histogram:

Lust4Life

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 694
    • http://www.shadowsdancing.com

Hi Jim - that is EXACTLY what I was hoping to see!
Thank you.

Now, to get the same thing on a GFX 100!   Bernard - are you listening??   :-)

I don't want to start a "range war" here but my personal experience and test do push me in favor of a 16 bit color file.  As I do a lot of "pushing" of the channels when converting to B&W, which is the historical majority of my work until just the last year or two, I find a distinct preference for a 16 bit file.

Best,
Jack

Logged
Jack

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15895
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

I don't want to start a "range war" here but my personal experience and test do push me in favor of a 16 bit color file.
So you'll be hard pressed to find many true 16-bit capture devices nor is it really necessary.... Keep in mind too, when you think you're editing 16-bit in Photoshop, you never are. Actually, it's 15 bits plus one level...done for algorithmic processing reasons. And since there really isn't a real life source of full 16 bit images, that's all the precision Photoshop needs.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

Lust4Life

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 694
    • http://www.shadowsdancing.com

So you'll be hard pressed to find many true 16-bit capture devices nor is it really necessary.... Keep in mind too, when you think you're editing 16-bit in Photoshop, you never are. Actually, it's 15 bits plus one level...done for algorithmic processing reasons. And since there really isn't a real life source of full 16 bit images, that's all the precision Photoshop needs.

All true, BUT I have played with 14 bit files and used a rather sophisticated Up-Res routine back when I was developing on SGI platform - the 16 bit ramp produced a MUCH smoother gradient in the skys, etc.

Hey, I just have my "dreams".
Have actually thought of developing a little program to offer conversions from 14 to true 16 bits, but doubt there is much market for it.
Logged
Jack

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3268
    • Peter Aitken Photographs

Christ on a crutch, who gives a fiddler's fart?
Logged
Peter
"Science does not care what you believe" - unknown

Lust4Life

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 694
    • http://www.shadowsdancing.com

It's comments like that which prove you and I have nothing of value to each other.

Logged
Jack

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8386

All true, BUT I have played with 14 bit files and used a rather sophisticated Up-Res routine back when I was developing on SGI platform - the 16 bit ramp produced a MUCH smoother gradient in the skys, etc.

Hi Jack,

That's somewhat to be expected, if the data has very little noise. But there's also a role to be played by the Raw converter. After all, the 14-bit Raw data has yet to be demosaiced, and that can/should be done in 16-bit per Channel, or even in floating-point numbers (reals instead of integers).

Quote
Hey, I just have my "dreams".
Have actually thought of developing a little program to offer conversions from 14 to true 16 bits, but doubt there is much market for it.

For a commercial product the market size an issue, but it's also possible to contribute to an initiative like e.g. RawTherapee.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Lust4Life

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 694
    • http://www.shadowsdancing.com

Hi Jack,

That's somewhat to be expected, if the data has very little noise. But there's also a role to be played by the Raw converter. After all, the 14-bit Raw data has yet to be demosaiced, and that can/should be done in 16-bit per Channel, or even in floating-point numbers (reals instead of integers).

For a commercial product the market size an issue, but it's also possible to contribute to an initiative like e.g. RawTherapee.

Cheers,
Bart

Bart, you have several good points there.

I have tried several of the converters but have not found one that just clicked with me.
Given:  Luminar is of no interest to me, any more than chewing bubble gum at dinner is. 
Lightroom (CS6) is getting a little old for me.  (I do not like "subscription software, whether it is Cloud based or not so CS6 is where I get off the Adobe train.)
I have just again updated my C1 software for the GFX as they had a promotion and I had not played with it in a couple of years.  But, I don't find that exactly what I want either. 

Phocus from Hassie - did use that for many years back when I was shooting the H series, up through the H5D 50.

You have a great point on RAWTherapy - I tried the free trial but lost almost all of the trial time to a health issue that flared up!  I think it had some potential but a steep learning curve if one wants to master all it offers.  Do you feel that is a valid assessment of it?

Jack
Logged
Jack

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8386

Bart, you have several good points there.

I have tried several of the converters but have not found one that just clicked with me.
Given:  Luminar is of no interest to me, any more than chewing bubble gum at dinner is. 
Lightroom (CS6) is getting a little old for me.  (I do not like "subscription software, whether it is Cloud based or not so CS6 is where I get off the Adobe train.)
I have just again updated my C1 software for the GFX as they had a promotion and I had not played with it in a couple of years.  But, I don't find that exactly what I want either. 

Phocus from Hassie - did use that for many years back when I was shooting the H series, up through the H5D 50.

You have a great point on RAWTherapy - I tried the free trial but lost almost all of the trial time to a health issue that flared up!  I think it had some potential but a steep learning curve if one wants to master all it offers.  Do you feel that is a valid assessment of it?

IMHO, Capture One and RawTherapee have the best demosaicing algorithms. RawTherapee is an amalgam of interesting techniques, which makes the learning curve quite steep, whereas C1 is very customizable and very powerful under-the-hood.

'Affinity Photo' is interesting as an alternative to Photoshop, but it also has a Raw conversion engine that can demosaic in 32-bit floating point format. It's not quite as good as the C1 or RT demosaicing, but the 32-bit conversions can be helpful with other aspects of the postprocessing.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Lust4Life

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 694
    • http://www.shadowsdancing.com

Bart,
Sounds like we are on the same page about C-1 and RAWTherapee.
I just have not had time this summer to digest more than one interface and set of tools so I choose C-1 with the 1/2 price offer they made for users of the GFX.

Will take another look at RT over the winter if all goes well.

Again, thanks for input here.
Jack 
Logged
Jack
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up