New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography Discussion of all things graphics.

Aperture 2.0, the Nikon D300 and RAW compression settings


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
DarkDTSHD

 
Member Since: Jun 09, 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 117
DarkDTSHD is an unknown at this point

DarkDTSHD is offline
Hello,

I just received my copy of Aperture 2.0. Upgraded it to the latest version (forget which). And will be shooting in RAW for the first time. And would like to know which compression setting I should set my D300 to to work with the Aperture 2.0 RAW converter. As I was told not all modes in all DSLR's work with all converters.

The D300, as D300 users should know, has 3 options. "Lossless" (loose 20-40% of data with no loss in image quality, the default), "compressed" (loose 40-50% with noticeable loss in image quality) and "uncompressed" (no compression at all, RAW file saved in it's entirety as it was shot).

Recommendations? Thanks!!
QUOTE Thanks
Dysfunction

 
Dysfunction's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 17, 2008
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 6,620
Dysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant futureDysfunction has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: 2008 and 2011 15" mbps, late 11 iMac, iPhone 4s, and too many ipods and other stuff

Dysfunction is offline
I shoot uncompressed, works fine in Aperture 2. I really don't see a lot of need for compression with the availability of CF storage in multi-GB ranges.

mike
This machine kills fascists
Got # ? phear the command line!
QUOTE Thanks
DarkDTSHD

 
Member Since: Jun 09, 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 117
DarkDTSHD is an unknown at this point

DarkDTSHD is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dysfunction View Post
I shoot uncompressed, works fine in Aperture 2. I really don't see a lot of need for compression with the availability of CF storage in multi-GB ranges.
Thanks for posting.

I take it you're a D300 owner too. Roughly how big are the file sizes uncompressed? And have you tried "lossless" while using Aperture 2.0? Why aren't you shooting in "lossless"?
QUOTE Thanks
Mjc.americor

 
Mjc.americor's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 02, 2008
Location: Traverse City MI
Posts: 447
Mjc.americor will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 15.4" MacBook Pro 4GB 500GB 2.4Ghz

Mjc.americor is offline
I shoot RAW with my canon 20D and the RAW files are about 9MB, using Lightroom to import and edit

15.4" MacBook Pro Unibody
2.4GHz 4GB Ram and 500GB HD nVidia Geforce 9600
QUOTE Thanks
shmendall

 
shmendall's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 04, 2007
Location: Lancaster, England
Posts: 145
shmendall is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: IMAC 20"!! WOOH YEAH!! 2gb ram - 250gb hd 2.16ghz core 2 duo

shmendall is offline
I would shoot in RAW if I could notice any difference!

Diana F+
HOLGA 135
Actionsampler
QUOTE Thanks
Mjc.americor

 
Mjc.americor's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 02, 2008
Location: Traverse City MI
Posts: 447
Mjc.americor will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 15.4" MacBook Pro 4GB 500GB 2.4Ghz

Mjc.americor is offline
i dont think that you notice a difference, but it is easier to edit and manipulate to your standards and how you like things. there is an advantage over JPEG

15.4" MacBook Pro Unibody
2.4GHz 4GB Ram and 500GB HD nVidia Geforce 9600
QUOTE Thanks
DarkDTSHD

 
Member Since: Jun 09, 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 117
DarkDTSHD is an unknown at this point

DarkDTSHD is offline
I haven't shot in RAW yet but supposedly you DO see a difference in detail and color range in prints. You (we) probably wouldn't see much if any difference on the monitor. Though I wonder...if we properly calibrate our monitors (most of us don't) would we not see a difference? Hmmm...

Any how if one poster says he can use "uncompressed" with Aperture 2.0 without problems then it's likely there would be no problems in the "lossless" setting. Has this been your experience too? Any one can comment of course.
QUOTE Thanks
Del

 
Member Since: Dec 24, 2006
Location: N. Ireland
Posts: 901
Del has a spectacular aura about
Mac Specs: Mac Pro 2xQuad core 2.8GHZ

Del is offline
You WONT see a difference by shooting RAW, but dang there is a massive difference when it comes to post processing them, RAW is much more forgiving allowing you to rescue files that would otherwise be deleted.

For a real world example of what i mean see this thread in my blog.
http://derekclegg.net/blog/?cat=8
QUOTE Thanks
MissMurder

 
MissMurder's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 07, 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 133
MissMurder will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: mid'09 MBP; 2.53GHz; 8GB RAM; OS X 10.8.2 | 2G iPod Touch 32GB | iPhone 5 iOS 7.1 16GB | iPad Air

MissMurder is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del View Post
You WONT see a difference by shooting RAW, but dang there is a massive difference when it comes to post processing them, RAW is much more forgiving allowing you to rescue files that would otherwise be deleted.

For a real world example of what i mean see this thread in my blog.
http://derekclegg.net/blog/?cat=8
hmmm, that was very clarifying, thanks!
i have yet to shoot in raw (i have yet to shoot at all, actually), and i was wondering if i was going to notice any difference...

flickr
QUOTE Thanks
CameraMike

 
CameraMike's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 28, 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 58
CameraMike will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: BlackBook 13.3" 2.13ghz Intel Core 2 Duo 2gb SDRAM 160gb HD

CameraMike is offline
Usually I won't see any difference between Raw and shooting Jpg but if I look closely in my highlights I do see color aberrations more in the Jpgs.
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« Pictures not showing up on Digital Photoframe | inaccurate color representation »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?