Faster conversion of RAw files

JD
Posted By
John Doe
Oct 11, 2004
Views
470
Replies
10
Status
Closed
What you are you shooting in Raw and then converting to TIF? Seems like a waste of a powerful format. I don’t know anything about the software you are using but with Photoshop CS and ACR you load the image, make your Raw adjustments and then click ok and it is loaded in to Photoshop with the adjustments you made in ACR. With my Canon 20D CR2 files the only thing that takes time is making the adjustments in ACR. The loading of the images in to ACR and then finally in to Photoshop is very quick.

Also, 44 seconds for a 12MB file doesn’t sound all that bad. It has to open the file, convert it and write it back out and it is probably a larger .TIF than Raw file. It doesn’t sound that outrageous.

John

"Pixmaker" wrote in message
Hello, All:

I usa a Fuji S2 Pro and often shoot in the RAF mode (Fuji’s name for others’ RAW definition.) Later, before post processing the images, for the most part architectural work, it takes me forever to convert these RAF images to TIFF files.

I’m using about a 1200 MHz. machine and the Fuji EX converter.
Can anyone sort of "calibrate" me regarding what I feel are vwery long conversion times and what I can do to speed things along? I’m really getting antsy about all the time I’m consuming.

Yeah, I could plan to do the conversions while I’m doing something else but it annoys me to have to plan my work flow around a machine rather than the way I want to do it.

It is now taking about 44 seconds to convert a 12-mB RAF file to TIFF.
Pixmaker in FLL
==========================
It’s not the heat, it’s the humidity!
==========================
(…Think the humidity’s bad?
You should watch us vote!)
Related Tags
conversion fast file

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

J
jjs
Oct 11, 2004
"Pixmaker" wrote in message

Yeah, I could plan to do the conversions while I’m doing something else but it annoys me to have to plan my work flow around a machine rather than the way I want to do it.

It’s a good thing you aren’t a wet-process photographer. The answer is to get another computer to do the batch conversion so you can take ’em as they are processed. Obviating annoyance is not cheap.
J
jjs
Oct 11, 2004
"John Doe" wrote in message
What you are you shooting in Raw and then converting to TIF? Seems like a waste of a powerful format. I don’t know anything about the software you are using but with Photoshop CS and ACR you load the image, make your Raw adjustments and then click ok and it is loaded in to Photoshop with the adjustments you made in ACR. […]

You ruined the OPs day. Chances are he doesn’t know what RAW really is.
P
pixmaker
Oct 11, 2004
Hello, All:

I usa a Fuji S2 Pro and often shoot in the RAF mode (Fuji’s name for others’ RAW definition.) Later, before post processing the images, for the most part architectural work, it takes me forever to convert these RAF images to TIFF files.

I’m using about a 1200 MHz. machine and the Fuji EX converter.

Can anyone sort of "calibrate" me regarding what I feel are vwery long conversion times and what I can do to speed things along? I’m really getting antsy about all the time I’m consuming.

Yeah, I could plan to do the conversions while I’m doing something else but it annoys me to have to plan my work flow around a machine rather than the way I want to do it.

It is now taking about 44 seconds to convert a 12-mB RAF file to TIFF.

Pixmaker in FLL
==========================
It’s not the heat, it’s the humidity!
==========================
(…Think the humidity’s bad?
You should watch us vote!)
N
nomail
Oct 12, 2004
Pixmaker wrote:

I usa a Fuji S2 Pro and often shoot in the RAF mode (Fuji’s name for others’ RAW definition.) Later, before post processing the images, for the most part architectural work, it takes me forever to convert these RAF images to TIFF files.

I’m using about a 1200 MHz. machine and the Fuji EX converter.
Can anyone sort of "calibrate" me regarding what I feel are vwery long conversion times and what I can do to speed things along? I’m really getting antsy about all the time I’m consuming.

Yeah, I could plan to do the conversions while I’m doing something else but it annoys me to have to plan my work flow around a machine rather than the way I want to do it.

It is now taking about 44 seconds to convert a 12-mB RAF file to TIFF.

Before thinking about HOW to convert from RAW to TIFF in the fastest way, you should ask yourself WHY you are using RAW in the first place. It seems to me you are not taking any advantage from the RAW format, you just convert it to TIFF. If that’s the case, why not shoot in TIFF? Yes, TIFF’s are bigger so you may have to buy a bigger flash card, but you’d save a lot of time and time is also money.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/
B
bhilton665
Oct 12, 2004
From: (Johan W. Elzenga)

It seems to me you are not taking any advantage from the RAW format, you just convert it to TIFF. If that’s the case, why not shoot in TIFF?

Most cameras don’t offer both TIFF and RAW modes, just RAW and JPEG. I’ve used five different Canon dSLRs and none of them let you save in TIFF, for example.
N
nomail
Oct 12, 2004
Bill Hilton wrote:

From: (Johan W. Elzenga)

It seems to me you are not taking any advantage from the RAW format, you just convert it to TIFF. If that’s the case, why not shoot in TIFF?

Most cameras don’t offer both TIFF and RAW modes, just RAW and JPEG. I’ve used five different Canon dSLRs and none of them let you save in TIFF, for example.

It’s irrelevant what ‘most’ cameras do or don’t. The OP uses a Fujifilm Finepix S2 Pro. That camera does have TIFF as an option.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/
H
Hecate
Oct 13, 2004
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 18:26:32 -0700, Pixmaker
wrote:

Thanks, John. . . you made a cogent observation.

The difference, in my case, is approximately 35 mB files for TIFF versus about 12 mB files for RAF. That’s a 3:1 difference.
But you have poked at my brain, a bit, and more memory may be the way to go.

I just acquired a 2 gB microdrive so that will handle a lot of imaging. But I am a li’l antsy about committing that much data to a single media unit. Two gigs is a lot of data (and work, and sweat, and climbing, and time in the sun) to lose.

I may be a bit paranoid but I’ve been using a pile of 256 mB cards just to avoid the lost-data problem. We’ll see.
Remember it’s a disk drive and prone to damage when dropped, knocked and so forth. That’s why solid state memory such as CF or xD is better.

—

Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
P
pixmaker
Oct 13, 2004
Thanks, John. . . you made a cogent observation.

The difference, in my case, is approximately 35 mB files for TIFF versus about 12 mB files for RAF. That’s a 3:1 difference.

But you have poked at my brain, a bit, and more memory may be the way to go.

I just acquired a 2 gB microdrive so that will handle a lot of imaging. But I am a li’l antsy about committing that much data to a single media unit. Two gigs is a lot of data (and work, and sweat, and climbing, and time in the sun) to lose.

I may be a bit paranoid but I’ve been using a pile of 256 mB cards just to avoid the lost-data problem. We’ll see.

Thanks

Pixmaker in FLL
==========================
It’s not the heat, it’s the humidity!
==========================
(…Think the humidity’s bad?
You should watch us vote!)
P
pixmaker
Oct 15, 2004
I agree!

Pixmaker in FLL
==========================
It’s not the heat, it’s the humidity!
==========================
(…Think the humidity’s bad?
You should watch us vote!)
NE
no_email
Oct 15, 2004
easy to follow

MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥

– in 4 materials (clay versions included)

– 12 scenes

– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups

– 6000 x 4500 px

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections