Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Size of raw files.

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    franken
    franken e2 Member 113029 forum postsfranken vcard Wales4 Constructive Critique Points
    7 Aug 2011 - 6:58 AM

    When I was out yesterday I took a lot of raw images on my Pentax K-x. When I finished shooting my 8 gig memory card said I still had a fair amount of space left.

    When I returned home I loaded the files onto my computer and realised I'd shot 390 plus DNG raw files so the card should show as full?

    All the files are showing 4352 by 2868 12.4 megabytes yet the raw files are about 10-11 megabytes each. The instructions say they should be about 20 megabytes?

    I've also realised that they've been this size since I purchased the camera new last October.

    I've just checked the raw files from my old Pentax K2ooD and they are about 16 megabytes each?

    I shoot in DNG format raw (As I did with the 200d) I've just tested the Pentax raw format and the files are still around 10 megabytes!

    I know its early in the morning but I'm confused!

    Ken

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    7 Aug 2011 - 6:58 AM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    colin beeley
    colin beeley e2 Member 111070 forum postscolin beeley vcard England10 Constructive Critique Points
    7 Aug 2011 - 9:22 AM

    i thought photoshop converted raw into dng not the camera ,

    franken
    franken e2 Member 113029 forum postsfranken vcard Wales4 Constructive Critique Points
    7 Aug 2011 - 9:25 AM


    Quote: I thought photoshop converted raw into dng not the camera ,

    Pentax are the only company that give you the option of shooting in their raw format or Adobe DNG.


    Ken

    BarrieNeilPhotography

    Hi Ken

    Clutching at straws, does it have a "small RAW" setting as seen in Canon dSLRs so you capture smaller files rather than the full sized file (hope that makes sense). Smile

    HouseMartin
    7 Aug 2011 - 9:43 AM

    Just checked with my k-x Ken, and worryingly got an image of about 10.5M (I also shoot dng raw).

    So went back through my raw files and it's obviously content dependent as I have a mixture of file sizes from 9M to 18M depending on picture complexity.

    I do shoot in sRGB as well and I should imagine shooting in AdodeRGB will increase file size as well - off to try.

    Paul

    HouseMartin
    7 Aug 2011 - 9:49 AM

    Nope, came out the same

    Paul

    franken
    franken e2 Member 113029 forum postsfranken vcard Wales4 Constructive Critique Points
    7 Aug 2011 - 9:55 AM

    Thanks all for the input so far.

    cameracat
    cameracat  108578 forum posts Norfolk Island61 Constructive Critique Points
    7 Aug 2011 - 11:01 AM

    Barrie is looking in the right direction, Some makers offer " Compression " options for RAW data files, Some don't give you the option ( depends on camera spec and presumed market target) .

    Nikon offer on their pro bodies a lossless raw compresion, Though to be honest it hardly saves and space, Big memory cards are so cheap why bother crushing data....Smile

    Then there is the " 12bit " Or " 14bit " options on raw data, Plus as mentioned above....Smile


    Quote: I have a mixture of file sizes from 9M to 18M depending on picture complexity.

    Back to Nikon as an example, My D700 gives me the option to run with 12bit RAW data, Or 14bit, Obviously the 14bit is way better ( I have tested this and the 14bit is superior, No doubt about it....Grin ).

    However some if not all the " Non-Pro " Nikon bodies, Do not offer this as an option, Depending on model you get 12 or 14bit RAW data files ( Compressed Lossless ) with no means of changing that, But then why would you when shooting RAW.......Grin

    So for those puzzled by their particular camera brand/model......All I can offer is the old " Read the manual " or Read the spec sheet advise, Because its purely down to makers regarding specific models etc etc.......So there is no one particular answer.

    One way of checking though is the " Tiff " file size, Look at the open files size of a Fine ( best quality ) JPEG, Lets say that the size is 30Mb, A RAW file converted to an 8bit " TIFF " should be around the same size, Obviously the same RAW file converted to a 16bit TIFF, Should be double at around 60Mb.

    Its early on a Sunday, But I hope that helps explain a few mysteries......Grin

    User_Removed
    7 Aug 2011 - 11:20 AM

    There's clearly some compression going on. I would expect it to be lossless, so for example rather than storing 1200 separate 255 255 255 white pixels as separate bits of data they could be stored as 1 item of data.

    I know I'm oversimplifying how lossless compression works but it's just to give the gist.

    Ganto
    Ganto  8769 forum posts Ireland2 Constructive Critique Points
    7 Aug 2011 - 11:23 AM


    Quote: All the files are showing 4352 by 2868 12.4 megabytes yet the raw files are about 10-11 megabytes each.

    I think there may be some confusion here too. A 4352 x 2868 image would be 12.4 megaPIXELS, which is just the actual pixel count of the image, and does not convert directly to megabytes of data.

    franken
    franken e2 Member 113029 forum postsfranken vcard Wales4 Constructive Critique Points
    7 Aug 2011 - 12:44 PM


    Quote: All the files are showing 4352 by 2868 12.4 megabytes yet the raw files are about 10-11 megabytes each.

    I think there may be some confusion here too. A 4352 x 2868 image would be 12.4 megaPIXELS, which is just the actual pixel count of the image, and does not convert directly to megabytes of data.

    Sorry it was a typing error, you are correct.


    Ken

    ChrisV
    ChrisV  7718 forum posts United Kingdom26 Constructive Critique Points
    7 Aug 2011 - 1:28 PM


    Quote: There's clearly some compression going on. I would expect it to be lossless, so for example rather than storing 1200 separate 255 255 255 white pixels as separate bits of data they could be stored as 1 item of data.

    I know I'm oversimplifying how lossless compression works but it's just to give the gist.

    I reckon that's just about right.

    If the compression is truly lossless [I used to use it when I shot Nikon], surely it's a bit of a bonus?

    lobsterboy
    lobsterboy Site Moderator 1014006 forum postslobsterboy vcard United Kingdom13 Constructive Critique Points
    7 Aug 2011 - 2:47 PM

    DNG uses jpg losless compression so the file should be smaller than raw files. Though there is an oo[tion with DNG to include the original raw format as well which kind of negates the space savings.

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.