| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/03/2012 04:07:47 AM · #1 |
| This is going to sound completely noobish but I have to ask: Is editing your RAW photo in Lightroom going to yield better results than if you were to simple convert your RAW file to a TIFF file and do similar edits in Photoshop? And to what degree would those differences be? |
|
|
|
04/03/2012 04:33:44 AM · #2 |
| I don't quite follow- are you asking about the advantages and disadvantages of capturing in RAW then converting to TIFF after the fact or shooting directly to TIFF? |
|
|
|
04/03/2012 07:49:28 AM · #3 |
I'm not exactly following either. The main advantage of shooting RAW is the ability to do things like recover highlights and change white balance after the fact. Whether you do that in Lightroom or using some other tool, is a matter of preference. If you're doing a straight conversion to TIFF (I can't imagine you're shooting in TIFF; most digital cameras don't even have that as an option anymore), you must be using some software. Even the manufacturer's software should allow you some basic corrections before producing a TIFF file, JPG, or whatever. Or are you mass converting your RAW files?
|
|
|
|
04/03/2012 08:17:12 AM · #4 |
When you shoot in JPEG of TIFF the camera discards up to 88% of the image information.
That,s is what has been written at least.
So that is why I always shoot in RAW.
Still I don,t get your question either. |
|
|
|
04/03/2012 08:58:32 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by heavyj:
This is going to sound completely noobish but I have to ask: Is editing your RAW photo in Lightroom going to yield better results than if you were to simple convert your RAW file to a TIFF file and do similar edits in Photoshop? And to what degree would those differences be? |
I think I understand your question. Before RAW processing software (Adobe's Lightroom, Apple's Aperture, Canon DPP, etc.) came along, the old best way to process images was to convert to TIFF and process in Photoshop. But now, as you can see by responses above, it is taken for granted the new best way is to work on the RAW files directly.
Benefits of RAW processing vs. JPG or TIFF processing. |
|
|
|
04/03/2012 10:35:32 AM · #6 |
FWIW, as long as you convert to a 16-bit TIFF, there should be no loss of information from the RAW file. It will be less convenient to make adjustments, but from a data integrity standpoint there is no disadvantage.
The real question is why you'd want to do this. The only reason I'd export from Lr in TIFF format is to retain 16-bit data depth, which JPEG does not afford.
|
|
|
|
04/03/2012 10:38:24 AM · #7 |
| I always find highlight recovery more dificult from a TIFF, I know it shouldn't be so but it is. |
|
|
|
04/03/2012 11:19:28 AM · #8 |
Even with a 16-bit TIFF you still lose a little information in the bayer conversion process. All your intensity values should be preserved, but the color deltas between pixels might loose a little. Especially if you have a heavy white balance shift such as tungsten.
That being said, I would be surprised if it was even noticeable without checking individual pixel values. |
|
|
|
04/03/2012 11:59:37 AM · #9 |
Sorry if I was vague.
I shoot RAW. I import into lightroom. I then export as a TIFF file to work on in Photoshop. I usually make small adjustments in Lightroom before exporting and then do a majority of my PP in Photoshop, since I'm more comfortable in that application. I wondered if I was putting myself at a disadvantage by doing this and if doing more in Lightroom would preserve more of the quality of my photo before exporting as a TIFF file...
I've just begun using the adjustment brush in Lightroom 4 and it's pretty amazing. There are other applications in LR4 that I wondered if it would be better to do there than export and work on in Photoshop. Levels or Brightness/Contrast for example...do I have more latitude with the RAW file in LR4 or is it going to be almost the same in TIFF format in Photoshop? |
|
|
|
04/03/2012 12:58:21 PM · #10 |
| As long as it's a 16-bit TIFF, go with the workflow that works best for you. There may scientifically be a few bits of data lost in the transition to TIFF, but I don't think it is even close to a visually noticeable difference. |
|
|
|
04/03/2012 01:38:27 PM · #11 |
| At a minimum, I would correct the exposure and white balance in Lightroom. Beyond that, you're splitting hairs as to whether you use Lightroom or Photoshop. |
|
|
|
04/03/2012 01:44:42 PM · #12 |
My usual workflow has been to convert from RAW to JPG in Canon DPP and edit in PaintShop Pro. Since the last upgrade to X4, most of PSP's tools can now work on full 16 bit, so for those images where every extra bit of quality matters (usually challenge entries), I convert to TIF. More casual shots are converted to JPEG. Since TIF does have 16 bit color depth, I may be improving some of the trickier areas like skies, and holding the downgrade to 8 bit until the very end.
|
|
|
|
04/03/2012 09:06:30 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by bvy:
At a minimum, I would correct the exposure and white balance in Lightroom. Beyond that, you're splitting hairs as to whether you use Lightroom or Photoshop. |
Likewise for me. I'd keep exposure/WB changes done directly from RAW. Beyond that, your choice. Personally I keep all my stuff as PSD and then save a specific version for whatever the end needs dictate. TIFFs are/were more readily accepted for print as a standard format, but that's changed a bit these days, and I find it easier to just select my needs based on whatever my end needs are and set up a batch process using the image processor or whatever. Now, if I only had one end result, there'd be no reason for this and I'd readily just save as a final result.
Also, there are still a good number of cameras that capture direct to TIFF. I know, off the top of my head, that the D300, D300s, D3, D3x, D3s, D4 and D800 all do. however, I'm not positive if it is 8 bit or 16 bit off the top of my head. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/28/2025 02:00:48 PM EDT.
