The tool is called Exiftool, it's ancient, but I love it. exiftool.org/ DNG was created by Adobe in attempt to unify all the different camera-native formats. It's a lossless, open source format, that holds sensor captured data, and wraps it in a more friendly format. Mainly used to archive/share camera-native files. DNG is also considered a "RAW" format. The difference? Well, DNG is supported by the majority of graphics software, as it's an open format. People think it will also be more time-resistant, as proprietary formats might lose compatibility, while DNG will remain its compatibility due to its openness.
@@StudioPetrikas I had never asked myself the question of the file format of the camera. But recently I found a pentax k1, and you can choose .PEF or DNG format. It's curious, in darktable, you can't import two file formats in the same folder. (lumix RW2, pentax PEF/DNG, smartphone DNG)
If there's so much confusion about its usage, maybe it's not a good term to begin with? Imagine explaining that to a hobbyist (which, most photographers, are.) "Raw" in itself is so weird. There's so many 'raw data' things outside photography, that saying 'raw' becomes meaningless very quickly. If we lived in a perfect world where every camera spat out a '.csv' or even a '.dng' - sure, call it raw. But now we have so many proprietary formats, some of them even used by 3D software, or panorama/HDRI compositions, and then there's .raw file format itself. According to Wikipedia, '.tif' is also a raw format. It's "RAW file" according to Adobe; "Raw image" according to Wikipedia. I don't know. I hate it. And I see confused people everywhere, just because of its silly name.
@@StudioPetrikas > It's "RAW file" according to Adobe; "Raw image" according to Wikipedia. Well that sucks I think of 'raw' files like this: a list of voltage measurements from a grid of identical photodiodes (under different colour filters - specifics would be different for something like a foveon sensor of course) And that works, no matter what propreitary format. And yeah, cameras do processing to better match the individual photodiodes (fixed pattern noise calibration). Some do sneaky noise reduction (cheating). Others gain red/blue/green values differently (fujifiml 😡). Yet all those things have zero impact on how you work with the data. You still just treat it as an array of photodiode voltages. Raw meat is still raw, even if a butcher has cut it up, removed bones, aged it, added water to it, put it in a propreitary box etc. It's a convenient label that I still like despite whatever issues people have with it. I think it makes sense.
'RAW' implies an acronym and is in itself misleading as it is in fact a raw file and is unprocessed data off the image sensor. The only reason you can edit the 'image' in a raw file editor is that all raw file editing programs apply algorithms to allow the data to be interpreted as an image on a monitor. Therefore the camera white balance setting only applies to the camera processor produced JPEG image and as such is irrelevant to the raw file data and therefore can be largely ignored when editing using a raw file editor.
Sure, it contains 'raw' data, but calling it a raw file, or even worse, raw image, is no use to anyone and implies too much. The file contains integer numbers, but we don't call it an 'integer file'. Again, I see no point in grouping these files under this one weird umbrella, and it just confuses hobbyists, as it implies it's a magical format that encapsulates all cameras. For the second part - yep, I did watch the video I made :)
![[Darktable] Broken 'Pink' highlights and how to fix them](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z-zVMHKTBBY/mqdefault.jpg)
Awesome video, very nicely presented and deals with just one concept which ensures it's nailed and understood. Thanks!
Thanks Gleb! I feel incredibly happy to see you here!
website of darktable is down ?!?
What do you use to open your RAW file in the terminal, and is there a difference between a DNG and the native camera file?
The tool is called Exiftool, it's ancient, but I love it. exiftool.org/
DNG was created by Adobe in attempt to unify all the different camera-native formats. It's a lossless, open source format, that holds sensor captured data, and wraps it in a more friendly format. Mainly used to archive/share camera-native files. DNG is also considered a "RAW" format.
The difference? Well, DNG is supported by the majority of graphics software, as it's an open format. People think it will also be more time-resistant, as proprietary formats might lose compatibility, while DNG will remain its compatibility due to its openness.
@@StudioPetrikas I had never asked myself the question of the file format of the camera. But recently I found a pentax k1, and you can choose .PEF or DNG format.
It's curious, in darktable, you can't import two file formats in the same folder. (lumix RW2, pentax PEF/DNG, smartphone DNG)
I think raw is a good term, if used right.
1. RAW👎-> raw 👍
2. raw image👎-> raw (data) file 👍
If there's so much confusion about its usage, maybe it's not a good term to begin with? Imagine explaining that to a hobbyist (which, most photographers, are.)
"Raw" in itself is so weird. There's so many 'raw data' things outside photography, that saying 'raw' becomes meaningless very quickly. If we lived in a perfect world where every camera spat out a '.csv' or even a '.dng' - sure, call it raw. But now we have so many proprietary formats, some of them even used by 3D software, or panorama/HDRI compositions, and then there's .raw file format itself. According to Wikipedia, '.tif' is also a raw format.
It's "RAW file" according to Adobe; "Raw image" according to Wikipedia.
I don't know. I hate it. And I see confused people everywhere, just because of its silly name.
@@StudioPetrikas
> It's "RAW file" according to Adobe; "Raw image" according to Wikipedia.
Well that sucks
I think of 'raw' files like this: a list of voltage measurements from a grid of identical photodiodes (under different colour filters - specifics would be different for something like a foveon sensor of course)
And that works, no matter what propreitary format.
And yeah, cameras do processing to better match the individual photodiodes (fixed pattern noise calibration). Some do sneaky noise reduction (cheating). Others gain red/blue/green values differently (fujifiml 😡).
Yet all those things have zero impact on how you work with the data. You still just treat it as an array of photodiode voltages.
Raw meat is still raw, even if a butcher has cut it up, removed bones, aged it, added water to it, put it in a propreitary box etc.
It's a convenient label that I still like despite whatever issues people have with it.
I think it makes sense.
'RAW' implies an acronym and is in itself misleading as it is in fact a raw file and is unprocessed data off the image sensor. The only reason you can edit the 'image' in a raw file editor is that all raw file editing programs apply algorithms to allow the data to be interpreted as an image on a monitor. Therefore the camera white balance setting only applies to the camera processor produced JPEG image and as such is irrelevant to the raw file data and therefore can be largely ignored when editing using a raw file editor.
Sure, it contains 'raw' data, but calling it a raw file, or even worse, raw image, is no use to anyone and implies too much. The file contains integer numbers, but we don't call it an 'integer file'. Again, I see no point in grouping these files under this one weird umbrella, and it just confuses hobbyists, as it implies it's a magical format that encapsulates all cameras.
For the second part - yep, I did watch the video I made :)
I had to abort this musac-video to stay sane, despite the interesting photo related content.