jaapv Posted May 8, 2013 Share #41 Posted May 8, 2013 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Sorry, that makes no sense at all. You do need a three-channel RGB monochrome file because programs like Silver Efex cannot handle greyscale files, nor can your printer. And you need three RGB channels to apply (split) toning. There is no advantage in using greyscale, only disadvantages. But if you insist, the mechanism is already in place. ACR will by default produce a 16-bit greyscale TIFF, exactly what you want. The raw data have no colour anyway, bayer-mosaiced or not, as they are just that - raw data waiting to be processed into an image file. DNG, again, is just an envelope containing the raw data and other files like the embedded jpg and other information the camera firmware adds, nothing more. Btw, a 16 bit TIFF file from the MM is about 110 GB. No way would the camera be able to process such files. It would come to a smoking stop. And even if it could, it would eat SD cards like popcorn. Edited May 9, 2013 by jaapv 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Leica M Monochrom DNG raw question. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
koferk Posted May 9, 2013 Author Share #42 Posted May 9, 2013 it might not make sense to you, but it does to me. 1st of, I don't "need" three channel RGB monochrome file, its just that Silver Efex needs it, and so, maybe its not the tool for this job. 2nd, lots of printers these days comes with shades of grey and black and can handle true monochrome. and so, i am insisting and 3 - a tif can be lossless compressed just like raw, so this too shouldn't be an issue. some nikons actually shoots in tif and the file size is way way way smaller then 110GB, btw, how did you come up with that number ? everyone is writing that even the MONO-RAW-DNG file is not a picture and still needs to be processed. no body is yet came with an explanation/reason for this, its all what you know about the regular 3 channels raw. still waiting for something here, maybe someone can explain to me why in audio they don't have a "raw" file before the actual "wave" file which already has the wave in it. i think its becouse they too, don't have any kind of 3-channel-filter before the recording medium. cheers Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
koferk Posted May 9, 2013 Author Share #43 Posted May 9, 2013 Raw audio format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia hmm.. i guess maybe understanding this is too much for my small brain.. seriously Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
koferk Posted May 9, 2013 Author Share #44 Posted May 9, 2013 maybe raw data is always possible but not always matters. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted May 9, 2013 Share #45 Posted May 9, 2013 Jaap, as a moderator can you arrange for one of those emoticons to be avaliable that show a head banging against a wall, it would be useful right now. I'm done, its like talking to a wall never mind banging your head against it. Steve 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted May 9, 2013 Share #46 Posted May 9, 2013 Can't we just assume your head to be suitably banged? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
koferk Posted May 9, 2013 Author Share #47 Posted May 9, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) please don't be mad at me. just read Raw image format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia here's the quotes: "To obtain an image from a raw file, this mosaic of data must be converted into standard RGB form. This is often referred to as "raw development". -we don't need to do it of course, no RGB for us "Other sensors, such as the Foveon X3 sensor, capture information directly in RGB form (using three pixel sensors in each location). These RGB raw data still need to be processed to make an image file, because the raw RGB values correspond to the responses of the sensors, not to a standard color space like sRGB. These data do not need to be demosaiced, however." -Color space is also not an issue with monochrome. its just grey-scale with NO color or RGB of any kind. this might help as well - TIFF/EP - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia anyways, you guy didn't convince me on this one i might try another forum Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 9, 2013 Share #48 Posted May 9, 2013 (edited) Well, to start with, that definition has it completely wrong in the sense of the tail wagging the dog. Demosaicing is but one step in raw development... Secondly, Foveon raw files need to be developed in a raw developer as well. ( http://www.graphics.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2321 ) as they are raw files. The remark in that TIFF article is out of date, it refers to a time that the raw developer for Foveon files was exclusively SPP. The rest is largely irrelevant or wrong. Thirdly, I just explained why it is wise to have Monochrom files in RGB instead of greyscale, as Lightroom always has. Fourthly I don't need to convince you, as these are facts, not opinions. Fifth: the earth is not flat. And for a reference Wikipedia is quite useless, being the world's largest depository of errors. If you are really interested in this subject, I recommend " Real World Color Management" by Fraser, Murphy and Bunting. Oh - I came up with the number by reading the info on an uncompressed TIFF file from the Monochrom on my Mac. As it is dependent on on the content of the image, you should treat it as an example. It could just as well be 150 MB. Just on a side note, one of the best ways of compressing a TIFF file is by converting it into an DNG... Edited May 10, 2013 by jaapv Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 10, 2013 Share #49 Posted May 10, 2013 (edited) Raw audio format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediahmm.. i guess maybe understanding this is too much for my small brain.. seriously Errr... That link is for audio... That has absolutely nothing to do with digital cameras. Edited May 10, 2013 by jaapv Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
koferk Posted May 10, 2013 Author Share #50 Posted May 10, 2013 the audio file is related in that they are both the same kind of data files. raw sensor data. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdriceman Posted May 10, 2013 Share #51 Posted May 10, 2013 Jaap, as a moderator can you arrange for one of those emoticons to be avaliable that show a head banging against a wall, it would be useful right now. I'm done, its like talking to a wall never mind banging your head against it. Steve But for those of us that aren't actually involved in this discussion this thread is entertaining. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 10, 2013 Share #52 Posted May 10, 2013 (edited) the audio file is related in that they are both the same kind of data files.raw sensor data. Ah I see, so you process your music in Lightroom. You still don't get it. raw is not a file; it is a bunch of zeroes and ones coming from the ADC of your camera which is written into a camera-specific format, like a .crw or .nef or .dng etc. file by the camera firmware after playing around with the data for a bit. (Or converted into a .jpg file by the camera firmware, which, fyi, has an RGB content out-of-camera for the Monochrom as well.) This file must be turned into something your postprocessing software can use, like for instance a .tif or .jpg file. Edited May 10, 2013 by jaapv Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted May 10, 2013 Share #53 Posted May 10, 2013 i might try another forum Try the DPR (Digital Photography Review) Leica forum. They are very nice people, not at all rude, and will be happy to devote their spare time answering your question. Steve Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tanks Posted May 10, 2013 Share #54 Posted May 10, 2013 ...anyways, you guy didn't convince me on this one i might try another forum I think based on all the information relayed, the answer to your original question is YES. And, in reality, the answer does not really matter. If you want to do anything with the DNG file it has to be converted. So, even if converting to TIFF caused degradation it is a step one has to take. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
koferk Posted May 10, 2013 Author Share #55 Posted May 10, 2013 i will try that other forum (as well) thanks.. a few answers - first of all, i did actually edited some tif's with audacity in order to do some glitch art - i recommend it to everyone, it's lots of fun. http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/10/19/3358811/glitch-art-audacity.jpg now try to do that with photoshop and see if you can come close besides that - all digital things are always nothing but zeros and ones, not only raw files. and also, every file needs a software and a computer in order to "be something" more then zeros and ones. so again, i know this "explanation", but all you say are old spins i already know. its like even if the leica-mono could shoot in tif, everyone here knows that mono-raw is the best way to start editing, but no one really understands why. i guess we all agree here (sort of) - its just that no one seems to be able to explain. much love to everyone if you have more ideas of how to explain this to me, please do Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 10, 2013 Share #56 Posted May 10, 2013 (edited) Well, maybe you should substitute " I " for " no one " Just thank your lucky stars 01AF hasn't stopped by (Don't bother to ask for an explanation - it is an insider joke) As for more ideas - well.... its all what you know about the regular 3 channels raw. This one is simple - it does not exist (except maybe in your imagination) Edited May 10, 2013 by jaapv Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted May 10, 2013 Share #57 Posted May 10, 2013 Can we make this thread a sticky? [i'm beginning to think he's playing with us.] Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 10, 2013 Share #58 Posted May 10, 2013 I don't think so- nobody can fake this. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpk Posted May 11, 2013 Share #59 Posted May 11, 2013 (edited) [i'm beginning to think he's playing with us.] I don't think so... I am also interested in what really is inside the Mono-RAW. You still don't get it. raw is not a file; it is a bunch of zeroes and ones coming from the ADC of your camera which is written into a camera-specific format ...which gives you a file. So the result is: RAW-data is saved to a file. Let's start here again: sensor -> ADC -> DNG -> converter -> TIFF/JPG. In case of a color sensor it's clear what the converter does (demosaicing and all that stuff). But in case of the Monochrom DNG, we still don't exactly know how the RAW-data is stored inside the DNG: if it's not vetcor-like, it must be TIFF-like. So the remainig question is: can the TIFF-like saved RAW-data inside the DNG contain more information than the exported TIFF? If yes, the converter has to cut off some of the information in order to export a TIFF/JPG. OK. Who knows if this is true or not? Edited May 11, 2013 by jpk Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
koferk Posted May 11, 2013 Author Share #60 Posted May 11, 2013 word.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.