D300 shooting in .tiff

[flaneur]

I have just purchased a D300 - a lovely thing it is too. Like many unsuspecting people I have found out

CS2 doesn't support the raw files. That's annoying but it isn't the basis for my question.

 

I am photographing a project at the moment which requires I shoot landscapes at dusk and dawn. I will

be bracketing to get a good exposure range -

 

QUESTION: - would it be too limiting if I shot in .tiff rather than raw? i.e. will I be losing out on too

much information?

 

The end product will be exhibition quality, A3 to A1, printed images. I usually shoot raw but because of

the CS2 non-support issue - just at the moment I don't have the facility to open the raw images.

 

Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks. Anne

[iangriffiths]

Hi Anne,

 

I believe you can download a free RAW plug-in from Adobe to support your D300.

 

Can't comment on tiff as I only work in RAW/NEF.

 

Cheers

 

Ian

[hans_janssen]

You can download that plug-in but it can be used only in CS3. Shoot RAW and use the free NX that came with the cam.

[Richard Williams]

You will have more latitude with raw, though as you say you can cover your bases with bracketing. But there are other options for raw conversion that won't cost you anything:

 

(1) Use the Capture NX software that probably came bundled with your camera to do the raw conversions (the conversion quality is arguably 'better' than Adobe's, anyway). Or use the free View NX download for batch conversion (less control, same quality). Convert to 16-bit tiff and load directly into Photoshop.

 

(2) Get the latest version of the DNG converter (rather confusingly bundled with one of the Adobe Camera Raw 4.x bundles for CS3). Throw away the Adobe Camera Raw 4.x plugin, but keep the DNG converter (which doesn't need CS3, or any version of Photoshop). Convert your NEFs to DNG with this DNG converter, and load them into CS2 via your existing ACR 3.x plugin.

[flaneur]

Thanks for your comments.

 

Richard - what is the difference between (a) shooting in RAW and using NX to convert to tiff

for use in CS2, and (b) just shooting in tiff to start with and going straight to CS2?

[tholte]

"would it be too limiting if I shot in .tiff rather than raw?" How do you shoot in tiff? You can convert a raw file or jpeg to a tiff file but I don't quite follow how you can "shoot" in tiff.

[flaneur]

Hi Tim

 

The D300 has several options for output - RAW, tiff and several sizes of jpeg. I didn't know

it was possible either until I bought the D300!

[ron_hiner2]

Anne -- there is really no reason to shoot in TIFF -- if you are making exhibition quality prints, start with raw. Convert in NX -- and you will have full control image prior to conversion. I find that NX conversions produce nicer results than any Adobe conversions anyway.

[seandepuydt]

I agree with Ron. NX works well with RAW files, convert to TIFF in NX, make minor adjustments to your TIFF files in CS.

[tri-x1]

Raw files contain more information but I believe they are smaller than Tif files.I initially show raw, then process and stored "keepers" as tifs. Now I store everything raw, fine tune the files and then make tifs or jpegs as needed.

[uffe hagen]

You could also use the free Adobe DNG converter. It will convert you RAW to dng lossless, ans CS2 can handle that

[douglas_greenberg]

You can indeed shoot in TIFF if you like, but I've never seen any reason to do this. The files are actually larger than RAW files and you lose the advantages of shooting RAW.

[ilkka_nissila]

TIFF files open in almost any image editor ever made and they don't have JPG compression artifacts. The time to open the file in the image editor is also typically shorter than when opening a NEF file. Thus, if you want to submit files without artifacts and are comfortable shooting with the camera settings (e.g. white balance) and exposure set correctly then TIFF is a sensible option if you don't want to do the post-processing yourself.

 

I haven't advanced to a level where I could get the best possible result by just using the camera settings for everything and so I use NEF to be able to fix things in post-processing.

[Richard Williams]

'Richard - what is the difference between (a) shooting in RAW and using NX to convert to tiff for use in CS2, and (b) just shooting in tiff to start with and going straight to CS2?'

 

The largest sized tiffs are more than twice as big as (even) 14-bit NEFs with lossless compression, so you'll soon fill up your CF cards. Straight batch conversion using View NX or Capture NX (without further intervention) should give you very similar results to the in-camera tiffs (closer, in fact, than the default ACR output would be). But if you are prepared to make some raw adjustments, shooting NEFs will make it easier to (e.g.) change the white balance when necessary (could be useful when shooting in tricky dawn and dusk light). The only real downside to shooting NEF is the time 'wasted' in running the raw converter (and you get a little of this back in shorter file transfer times!).

[walterh]

In other words nobody ever tested if there is a significant or relevant difference in image quality :-) ?

[joe_degennaro]

Hi, I tried using TIFF once or twice on the d300 and it seemed to me the camera transfer to the card went much slower. I was attempting to change a setting and noticed the images were still loading. If you do not want to deal with all the associated labor of RAW try it but I found it a little bit difficult to wait till all the images were loaded and as per the previous poster the card fills up awfully fast....When shooting film I scan to TIFF which is what i got used to but the digital factor has changed all that...Joe D.

[Richard Williams]

'In other words nobody ever tested if there is a significant or relevant difference in image quality :-) ?'

 

Of course not! It's much easier to pontificate here than to do any actual testing :-)

 

I'd actually be rather surprised if, for most purposes, there was any meaningful difference in quality between a perfectly-exposed and white-balanced jpeg (let alone tiff), and a NEF shot the same way and converted (without tweaking) in Capture (though I've never printed to A1). And of course with tiff, you don't even risk compression artefacts. But I've certainly been able to rescue what might politely be called less than perfect exposures in Capture that I couldn't fix post-conversion.

[juan_parm_nides]

Anne,

 

I would shoot in RAW 14 bits as the best quality mode from D300. Why 14 bits vs 12 bits?, With 14 bits you will get (mainly) more detail in shadows.

 

And download the ACR 4.4 from Adobe.

 

Cheers

[tholte]

Anne, I gotta bust loose and get a D300, my D70 is four years old and all the dials and switches are gettting creaky. Can shoot in tiff, what will the rascals think of next?

[flaneur]

Yes Tim, you gotta bust loose. I'm doing my post-grad year in photography - they told me at school I had to upgrade if I wanted to be a professional photographer - not sure that is so but I didn't need much to make me go buy the D300 - it's fantastical.

 

Your pix are great.

 

Thanks everyone for your response to my query. Very helpful indeed. Think I'll shoot in raw, and use NX batching to convert to .tiff.

 

cheers

[ken_kartes]

Anne, I had the same situation as you. CS2 with a D300, I never really pursued shooting tiff much but started using NX1 and just download the trial version of NX2. I do like NX2, it is great for the basics but I still find myself wanting to use CS2. The conversion process to convert NEF files with the use of the DNG converter is a huge time consumer for me, I suppose it does depend on the volume of photos you want to convert. So my process has been, shoot NEF, open in NX2, levels, etc in NX2. If I want to edit more then I save as a tiff for CS2. It almost seems a waste to shoot in NEF to begin with. Anyone with better information on why not to shoot in tiff I would like to hear from.

[flaneur]

I have a bit of a mickey mouse way of approaching things now too. I take about 200-300 shots each time I photograph

for my present project. I shoot in RAW but also in small jpg. Then I download all files, using the jpgs to decide which

RAW files I want to convert using NX Capture. I seems to take my computer ages to convert from RAW to tif so I don't

want to convert all 300 shots, only the ones I want to use for the project.

 

Someone gave me a copy of CS3 (er not a kosher one obviously) and I downloaded this, but am unable to get it to work.

I decided to remove the files and buy a copy of CS3 (just the photoshop upgrade) but now I can't get rid of the old CS3

files because they are embedded all over the place. I'm not a computer whizz so really aren't confident enough to just

pick files and trash them. I'm beginning to wonder if it is all worth the effort with the D300. Of course the camera is

worth it, but I no longer have a smooth, quick workflow.

[ken_kartes]

I would not say it is a mickey mouse way of editing, I used to do the same with my d70. I decided to skip the upgrade to CS3 right now. I am going to buy the upgrade for NX2, use it for the basics and convert the saved files to jpg unless I have to edit then I will save as tiff and then to a jpg in CS2. I use adobe bridge for quick looks to see if the photo is a keeper or not. Depending on what I am shooting I shoot nef and large jpg, I would rather use a larger card and have both, the nef is real nice to have as a back up if I was off on the exposure. Sometimes I shoot just nef and other times just large jpg. In my spare time I might try shooting and editing in tiff to see how the flow works.

[perry_arnett1]

<p>The D300 Manual says that Tiffs are recorded at 8 bits per channel or 24 bit total, whereas uncompressed NEF's are 14 bit TOTAL; would that not be a sufficient reason to use Tiff's when looking for the best potential image quality?<br>

Perry</p>