Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 28 Apr 2012 (Saturday) 21:29
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

downsizing RAW file when processing...

 
Don ­ Madson
Senior Member
Avatar
360 posts
Likes: 7
Joined May 2005
Location: 07920
     
Apr 28, 2012 21:29 |  #1

I've been a photographer for a long time...35mm, medium format, a few "bridge" digitals, now on my 4th DSLR body.

I've been shooting jpeg for the last few years, as I was satisfied with the images, and what I could do in PP with Elements (4,6,9). I tried Lightroom 3, and just don't like the format.

I want to shoot RAW files, and can process them with Elements 9, and I've also purchased Paint Shop Pro X4, which I like a bit better, as it offers more variety of tweaks.

My REAL question is...When I've processed the images (I shoot cycling competitions...Bike Races...) and want to downsize the images to 1.5-2M, I can't figure out how.

I edit EVERY picture, which takes lots of time, and my workflow often includes cropping a bit, which precludes batch processing to some extent. I am just not "getting" how to downsize easily.

Suggestions?

Thanks!
Don


dmadson.photoreflect.c​om
T'ai Chi Ch'uan...Relaxation, with an attitude!
---------------
70D, Mamiya 645 Pro TL, some lenses, a tripod, a monopod, some filters, a few straps, some batteries, 2 flash units, a few bags...;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
imjason
Goldmember
1,667 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Apr 28, 2012 22:06 |  #2

raw files are read only files. you use a program such as pse or lightroom to view and edit. when you are satisfied with the edits, you can save or export your image out as a jpg or tiff. upon export you can resize to a lower resolution. your cr2 raw file will forever be a large file. one of the rationale behind this is that the cr2 is a proprietary file from canon, and companies such adobe obtain licences to view them, but not edit the cr2 files.

if you have alot of photos to edit, you SHOULD consider lightroom as it allows one to edit and manage large amounts of photos quickly.


Canon gear: EOS M, Canonet QL17, SX230HS, S95, SD1200IS
Non-Canon gear: D600, D5000, D70, XG-2, U20
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Apr 28, 2012 22:15 |  #3

imjason pretty much nailed it...

In the same way you can't turn an 8x10 transparency into a mounted 35mm slide, you can't really alter a raw file beyond perhaps zipping an entire shoot into an archival folder or something.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Don ­ Madson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
360 posts
Likes: 7
Joined May 2005
Location: 07920
     
Apr 28, 2012 22:23 |  #4

Thanks, Guys!

While I was waiting for replies, I was fooling around with PSPx4, and found that I can convert it into a PSD file, which rendered a 13.4mb image down to a 1.74mb image. That's pretty much what I want to do.

It also looks like I CAN batch process with PSPx4, and I'll be tuning up my workflow there, too. I'll see what tiff turns 'em into, because I know that when i jpeg'd them, they stayed huge...

It's just a process I'll have to get used to.

Thanks again!
Don


dmadson.photoreflect.c​om
T'ai Chi Ch'uan...Relaxation, with an attitude!
---------------
70D, Mamiya 645 Pro TL, some lenses, a tripod, a monopod, some filters, a few straps, some batteries, 2 flash units, a few bags...;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Apr 28, 2012 22:28 |  #5

Good that you found a satisfactory solution but you are giving up raw as raw as well as the non-destructive editing capability of Lightroom.

Granted, it's unusual to need to press a "Reset Button" for most projects but being able to if the need truly arises is not a bad thing.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Don ­ Madson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
360 posts
Likes: 7
Joined May 2005
Location: 07920
     
Apr 28, 2012 22:36 |  #6

Yeah...having the archival original is certainly a good thing, but I'd probably only REALLY need to save important family pictures, as the bike racing is pretty much a hobby...not even paying for fuel to get to the races. When I take images that will be printed large, or that have some other intrinsic reason for maintaining the large file, I can certainly make that "executive" decision at the moment I'm viewing it. I absolutely LOVE digital darkroom work!

See ya!


dmadson.photoreflect.c​om
T'ai Chi Ch'uan...Relaxation, with an attitude!
---------------
70D, Mamiya 645 Pro TL, some lenses, a tripod, a monopod, some filters, a few straps, some batteries, 2 flash units, a few bags...;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 545
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Apr 28, 2012 23:47 |  #7

Don Madson wrote in post #14345903 (external link)
Thanks, Guys!

While I was waiting for replies, I was fooling around with PSPx4, and found that I can convert it into a PSD file, which rendered a 13.4mb image down to a 1.74mb image. That's pretty much what I want to do.

It also looks like I CAN batch process with PSPx4, and I'll be tuning up my workflow there, too. I'll see what tiff turns 'em into, because I know that when i jpeg'd them, they stayed huge...

It's just a process I'll have to get used to.

Thanks again!
Don

Something's way off here -- a jpeg won't be a bigger file than a psd of the same image! I'd suggest you recheck things. A jpeg at its highest quality setting can be pretty big because it's not being compressed, but I've never seen a psd processed to be smaller than a jpeg!

Don Madson wrote in post #14345973 (external link)
Yeah...having the archival original is certainly a good thing, but I'd probably only REALLY need to save important family pictures, as the bike racing is pretty much a hobby...not even paying for fuel to get to the races. When I take images that will be printed large, or that have some other intrinsic reason for maintaining the large file, I can certainly make that "executive" decision at the moment I'm viewing it. I absolutely LOVE digital darkroom work!

See ya!

Well it's true that saving jpegs and tossing the Raw files can save disk space, but then you have lost any advantage to shooting Raw once you are done with the initial processing.

If the racing shots don't require any special processing, well, you could always shoot jpegs and print from a Large Fine jpeg.

I do all my shooting in Raw, and like you it's a hobby, but to me that means I want to get the best out of my photos, and with the way Raw processors advance over time and my abilities creep ahead, the ability to revisit a Raw file I shot 5 years ago and to apply new post-processing capabilities is very cool!

But, yeah, there are some things that just don't benefit from Raw, although I'm not inclined to spend time on that type of shooting.

Today was interesting -- I was on a POTN meetup in the city doing street photography. The sky was fairly overcast meaning you had to deal with a bright grey sky a lot which is lousy for a lot of scenes and you have to do a juggling act. I wanted to not blow out the sky because I wanted to preserve some detail there otherwise it would just suck.

So, it wasy "only" street photography, not landscape/scenic photography (although I did do some shots involving cityscape and the waterfront).

Anyway, I shot over 700 photos, and a bunch have that "ugly" sky. It's nice that with the Raw format I can actually pull some detail out of the sky! And, can do that with one shot in a scene, and then apply the recovery to all the other shots from the scene!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,478 posts
Likes: 198
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Apr 29, 2012 06:08 |  #8

The pack-rat instinct to take advantage of digital's ability to shoot huge (by film standards) quantities and then save everything is a trap. I knew a guy many years ago who was the photo editor for a magazine and formerly had been one of the mag's photographers. He once remarked that he had traded his primary work tool from a camera to a trash can. The first step in processing the 500 shots should be finding the fifty really good ones. Edit them and leave them as Raws. The ones you want to share on-line or send to a print lab convert to jpgs, send them off and then delete them. It makes far more sense to archive 50 good CR2s than 50 good jpgs and 450 average jpgs.


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Don ­ Madson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
360 posts
Likes: 7
Joined May 2005
Location: 07920
     
Apr 29, 2012 08:28 |  #9

Thanks, y'all!

After reading the posts, and and going through various workflow scenarios, not a lot has changed. As I average @700 shots a race, and the only variables in my process seems to be shooting in RAW with it's ability to capture more detail resulting in a much higher file size, making it necessary to account for space on the drive, or shooting in jpg, and being satisfied with the less detailed capture and less able processing but space-saving results, I'm still on the fence.

No, the jpegs were NEVER larger than the RAW, I must have mis-stated the statement. I need to just go out and shoot a batch, and see if I can streamline my workflow, to enable me to shoot RAW and convert and batch process into jpg, psd, or something else.

I know I'm rambling, but I'm still ignorant, so thoughts/questions just sorta fall out. I'll need to re-size RAW files to send them over my email circuit, and it isn't as straightforward downsizing a RAW file as it is in my elements program when downsizing jpegs. As I don't do batch image emails, it shouldn't be THAT much of a problem. I just have to learn the relation between pixel count and image resolution. Sigh...not any less difficult than a wet darkroom, but no chemical smells, and no physical clean-up.

Thanks again, folks!
Don


dmadson.photoreflect.c​om
T'ai Chi Ch'uan...Relaxation, with an attitude!
---------------
70D, Mamiya 645 Pro TL, some lenses, a tripod, a monopod, some filters, a few straps, some batteries, 2 flash units, a few bags...;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,029 views & 0 likes for this thread
downsizing RAW file when processing...
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Willday
1089 guests, 305 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.