Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Sony (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/sony-34/)
-   -   H9 in RAW mode (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/sony/125350-h9-raw-mode.html)

Sunbeam35 Jul 7, 2007 11:57 AM

I am a novice with my new H9 camera and have heard discussions on RAW and have no idea what it is.

Will my camera shoot in RAW? I have seen nothing in the manual but still looking.

I am curious :mad: and would like to know what the initials RAW stands for.

Thank your for any help.



Cyberf828 Jul 7, 2007 12:08 PM

Heres some good info.



http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,123477/article.html

CyberShotNut Jul 7, 2007 12:27 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAW_image_format



The H9 does not have raw mode...

nickphoto123 Jul 7, 2007 7:17 PM

Hi Sunbeam,

To my knowledge, the term RAW has the same connotation as the word 'Uncooked'.

Digitally, all of the data from the sensor captured during an exposure is saved for future use. This saving process includes a non-destructive condensation of the original data, to save storage space on the memory card.

Software able to reverse the condensation process is required to 'open' the image to be viewed as an image on one's PC.

The H9 does not have Raw format available to the user.

BUT..BUT..BUT.. The H9 CAPTURES EVERYTHING IN RAW and then subtracts noise and then processes the image in the Bionz processor. Sony attempts to do all RAW processing for you n the H9.

Many people, myself included, are satisfied with this 'built-in' processing buy Sony. It actually has saved me hundreds of hours ( so far ) at my PC that I would have had to spend with my Sony R-1's images.

I am at 10,000+ H9 images with my camera ( so far ).

Many people, as they post their opinions on the web, are not happy with this built-in Sony processing.

When I bought my H9, one of the main reasons was because of this promised built-in processing. For me, it has delivered.

I invite you to read my Real Life User's H9 Review in this Sony Forumright here at Steve's-Digicams. Just look at my profile and my posts. My H9 review threads are so titled.

Regards,

Nicholas


Sunbeam35 Jul 7, 2007 9:19 PM

Dear Nicholas,

I want to thank you for your kind responce to my questions. Your explainations and suggestions are both clear and comprehensive. I look forward to reading your posts of reviews, and future information.

It's a pleasure meeting you on line. As I become more knowledgable in this field, I hope to read and see more of your expertise in this immense study of photography.

Again, I thank you

With kindest regards,

Sunbeam

Sunbeam35 Jul 7, 2007 9:31 PM

Dear Cyberf828,

Thank you for the informative tip. I printed the article out and will read it and have it on record.

Very Helpful,

Regards,

sunbeam

Santos Jul 8, 2007 1:31 PM

nickphoto123 wrote:
Quote:


BUT..BUT..BUT.. The H9 CAPTURES EVERYTHING IN RAW and then subtracts noise and then processes the image in the Bionz processor. Sony attempts to do all RAW processing for you n the H9.

This is totalnonsense. Alldigital cameras, and I mean EVERY single digital camera on the face of the earth, produces a compliation of RAW data which is then processed by the internal software to produce a jpeg file, or TIFF in some cases.

Sony's "Clear RAW" processing is marketing double talk that means absolutely nothing.....

cheers....





nickphoto123 Jul 8, 2007 7:27 PM

Santos,

You are incorrect.

Sony is the first to apply noise reduction to a RAW image prior to sending it to the image processor, in this case the Bionz processor. No other manufacturer has offered this so far.

The time it has saved me in processing images makes the camera worth its price to me.

It is most helpful to others to be accurate in one's posts.

I don't indulge in nonsense nor due I knowingly post nonsense in my threads.

I hope you can now see what takes place in the H9.

Either you like the results or you don't.

Nicholas

Santos Jul 9, 2007 9:20 AM

1 Attachment(s)
nickphoto123 wrote:
Quote:

Santos,

You are incorrect.

Sony is the first to apply noise reduction to a RAW image prior to sending it to the image processor, in this case the Bionz processor. No other manufacturer has offered this so far.

The time it has saved me in processing images makes the camera worth its price to me.

It is most helpful to others to be accurate in one's posts.

I don't indulge in nonsense nor due I knowingly post nonsense in my threads.

I hope you can now see what takes place in the H9.

Either you like the results or you don't.

Nicholas
Nick:

I know that's what Sony are claiming. Do you know how all the other manufacturers are processing their RAW data? heh...neither do I. Sony's claim can neither be proven nor repudiated. It's a "throw-away"claim,that's why I said it's nonsense.

And yes, I can see what the Bionz processor is doing, and NO, I don't like at all.

Thereis one example below. The reviewer at dcreource is a very experiencedand meticulous photograher. With each review, he inlcudes standard photos of the same scene, at the same focal length,from the same position and with the same lighting. This makes it very easy to compare image quality with different cameras.

I tooka crop from the Sony H5 ( you know, the one with the old, antiquated, non-Bionz, no-name processor ) and compared it with the same crop from the H9 review. And before you go nattering about pixel peeping, I also printed each full size photo at 8x10 inches. The crops are very indicative of the print quality at that size, and at normal viewing distances.

Which one do you think looks better?

Actually, I don't dislike the H9, it's great for what it is. It's just not suitable for prints at 8x10 or larger.

cheers...


JimC Jul 9, 2007 10:20 AM

nickphoto123 wrote:
Quote:

Sony is the first to apply noise reduction to a RAW image prior to sending it to the image processor, in this case the Bionz processor. No other manufacturer has offered this so far.
How do you know this (that Sony is doing it that way and that they're the first)?

Manufacturers are not exactly open on how they process their images in camera. Ditto for how their raw files work. Heck, Sony has even used hard encryption algorithms with the raw files produced by some of their models in the past (the .srf files produced by the DSC-F828 is one example of that).

In fact, there is evidence to suggest that other manufacturers have been taking this approach (modifying the raw files first) for a long time. For example, it appears that Nikon modifies the .nef (raw) files produced from their cameras, so they are not really "raw" in the sense that it's data directly from the sensor (or rather the A/D converter).

I can remember Dave Coffin (the author of dcraw.c) commenting on that during some interviews a while back, specifically noticing spikes in the histograms indicating that multipliers were applied to the raw data (the raw files were pre-processed in some manner), and he probably knows as much about raw files as anyone on the planet.

You can see a list (incomplete) of software providers that use some or all of Dave Coffin's dcraw.c code under the "Other Raw Decoders" section of his main web page (and it's a long list):

http://cybercom.net/~dcoffin/dcraw/

I've seen evidence that other manufacturers are altering their raw files, too. For example, this post over at openraw.org:

http://www.openraw.org/node/1541

All cameras shoot in raw and this file is converted to jpeg if you shoot that way. The algorithms are getting more and more sophisticated now, and many newer raw conversion algorithms do some level of noise reduction. Since the image starts out raw in camera, it makes sense that manufacturers would want to do as much as possible, as early as possible in the image processing pipeline, to reduce noise prior to the final conversion to jpeg.

As for BIONZ, that's just a fancy marketing name. For example, Canon calls their newest processing engine "DIGIC III", Pentax calls their newest engine "Prime" and other manufacturers are naming theirs, too.

If you like Sony's processing, great. But, I wouldn't go so far as to say it's *that* different from what other manfacturers are doing, especially since camera manufacturers don't publish the algorithms used to process an image.

To determine that, you'd need knowledge of the undocumented, proprietary algorithms being used by all camera manufacturers to process their images. ;-)




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2