Quality of NEF conversion/demosaicization in Camera Raw

Hi Everyone,
Please, I have a question for you experts about image quality of Nikon D7100's NEF files opened in Camera Raw.
I have examined a D7100 NEF file, loaded in Camera Raw 7.4, and if magnified at higer zoom it is possible to see maybe some troubles in demosaicing.
You can clearly see that the inclined lines are demosaicized in blocks of 2x2 pixels. This is true regardless of the sharpness settings.
When you open this file in Nikon CaptureNX2 the problem is not present.
Please, see images linked above
Setting sharpness to 0%
http://gnafopiu.altervista.org/cnx2_vs_acr74_unsharp.jpg
Adding more sharpness:
http://gnafopiu.altervista.org/cnx2_vs_acr74_sharp.jpg
The file is downloaded from site DPReview, is a test shoot for a camera comparative.
I have noticed the same thing, more or less, opening other NEF files (from Nikon D7000, D5200, D3200 except D800).
With this issue, it seems is not taken advantage of the resolving power of the lens or the sensor resolution.
I would like to ask if this is really a problem or if there is some setting/configuration to manage it.
Thank you very much and sorry for the bad English writing.

At Vit said, demosaicing is a land of tradeoffs.
This particular issue is not directly related to PV 2003 vs 2010; however, the detail-oriented sharpening of PV 2010 will accentuate the blocks compared to PV 2003. The underlying issue is the nature of how ACR's current demosaic approach handles diagonally-oriented features. We are aware of it and of course it is a candidate for improvement in the future.

Similar Messages

Quality Loss when saving Jpeg from Camera Raw

I am try to do some color correction on 400 wedding photos. I open like photos in Camera Raw then synchronize, make a few additional adjustments and then save the photos as psd files. When I save the files, the quality drops dramatically. I can see pixels and jagged edges (looks like steps) on anything curved. The photographer will not give me the RAW files, so I have to work with these high quality jpegs and I would prefer to use camera raw as it is nice and easy to fix many of the photos quickly. How can I save these files so as to not lose quality? Oh, I am on a Mac.
--K

Ramón,
now I am quite baffled. For years ago I conducted respective tests and demonstrated, that repeated saving with the same "quality" does not introduce image deterrioration; others did the same tests and came to the same result.
Now, to be sure, I did it again, and the result contradicts my earlier findings. Although the deterrioration is after five consecutive savings practically irrecognizabe without hugely amplifying it, it is there, and that is an issue of principle.
While it is possible, that I and others made some error in those tests, the question is (for me) what causes the difference.
I verified, that the encoding parameters are unchanged. Thus the difference must come from the calculation required to transform between the original pixel values and the encoded values by
a. the conversion between RGB and YCbCr,
b. the discrete cosine transform (a variation of Furier transform).
However, any differences resulting from the calculation (iteration, rounding) should be eliminated by the subsequent lossy step, the "quantization" (which is an euphemism for "throwing away most of the data"). Even if there is a difference between the first and second savings, there should not be any between the fourth and fifth savings - but there is.
One explanation could be, that the encoding and decoding functions work with different precision, though this sounds very outlandish.
Anyway, darn.
Re the encoding parameters: they *have to be* stored in the JPEG file, otherwise the data could not be decoded, except by that program, which knows the parameters. However, JPEG is not designed for human consumption but for computers (this fact makes testing a program, which reads or writes JPEG data a serious PITA). The metadata can be analyzed only by a hex editor, and one has to know the structure of that data.
Re knowing, if the file has to be compressed or not: JPEG is *always* encoded. There are different variants of the encoding method, but there is no "unencoded" version.

NEF unsupported - A3.4 & Cam Raw 4.0

I'm brand new to Mac, Aperature, and photography. Problem: Images taken with Nikon 1 J2 in raw (NEF) format shows as "Unsupported Image Fomat" in Aperture. Both iPhoto and Preview also cannot open the files saying that they are unsupported raw formats. According to documentation, Nikon 1 IS a supported. Not sure what I am doing wrong. Here's what I did before importing files into my Mac:
Updated Mac to Mountain Lion (10.8.2)
Downloaded and installed Aperture (3.4.1) that included Camera Raw 4.0
Ran Software Update - This updated something ... I think it was an OS update
Imported RAW files from the SD card from my Nikon 1
I've been looking here on the Support Forum for any things I can try. I have deleted my preferences file and tried going to the Adjustments tab after selecting a thumbnail in hopes it does something. So far nothing is working. ANY advice or help is greatly appreciated!

You indicate the Nikon 1 J2 camera.
According to the current list at link below, Apple Camera RAW compatibility works with the Nikon 1 J1. No listing for the J2.
http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs/raw.html
You may need to wait for the next Camera RAW compatibility update and hope Apple adds support. Aperture, iPhoto and Preview all use the current version of the Camera RAW compatibility to render RAW files for viewing.
Shooting JPEG could be an option if you like until (and if) support is added.
Message was edited by: CorkyO2 to add the link

NEF File (.NEF) некорректно открывает Adobe Camera Raw

Доброго времени суток уважаемый Евгений. Adobe Camera Raw некорректно открывает NEF File (.NEF). В контрастных фотографиях в тенях не сохраняется информация,цветовые искажения. При помощи Capture One Pro 8 открываю фото,конвертирую в TIF File (.TIF),и при необходимости дальнейшая обработка в Photoshopе. Пробовал менять настройки в фотоаппарате в Режиме пиктуре контроль ( Nikon D810) но результат плачевный. FastStone Image Viewer ,Capture One Pro 8 открывают отлично.
Заранее спасибо Олег

The last word, "даннlе" is not understood by the three translator programs I've tried. If the last word is "данные" not "даннiе" then what you say translates to: "Good day. I cannot reduce the size of NEF File, and do not lose data."
This seems to be a new question. The file-size of D810 NEF files is very large, and they are already compressed by the camera, so you cannot make them much smaller. I don't think this is a problem with the software.

Photoshopcs6 mac 0sx10.9 unable to open NEF files, already installed camera raw DNG converter 8.6

just installed photoshopcs6 running mac 0xs10.9 , installed DNG converter camera converter8.6 and still unable to open NEF files

Which nikon camera are the nef files from?
If you go to Photoshop>About Plug-In and click on the words Camera Raw, what version does it say?
Have you tried Help>Updates from within photoshop cs6 to the camera raw 8.6 plugin?
(then you shouldn't have to use the dng converter, unless your nikon is a very new model)

Getting Nikon D3100 NEF Photos Into CS4 Camera Raw

I am a novice photographer (some of my work is here: http://www.chrisinmotion.com/office1.htm). I recently bought a Nikon D3100 DSLR but can't for the life of me get any of the Native NEF images to open in Photoshop CS4 Camera Raw. What steps do I need to follow to accomplish this task and what additional software do I need to download. I have updated CS4 with all the plug-ins. I would be ever so grateful for a step by step outline. Thank you. -- Chris

The Nikon D3100 is NOT supported by any version of Adobe Camera Raw that runs with CS4. There will never be any updates to CS4.
You have three options:
1.— Upgrade to CS5; or
2.— Download the latest version of the free Adobe DNG Converter, currently 6.4, and use it to convert your raw Nikon files to raw DNG files first, then open those raw DNG files in Adobe Camera Raw 5.7 hosted by Photoshop 11.0.2 ("CS4"); or
3.— Use the Nikon software.

NEF processing in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR)

I originally posted thin in the Photoshop forum and someone pointed out to me that there was an ACR forum.
How exactly does ACR 5.4 determine color for Nikon Nef files? Does Adobe use their own unique color profile for Nikon cameras?
I did the following tests with a D700.
I used the capture mode RAW+jpg fine. I took photos with the camera set to srgb and then to Adobe RGB 98.
I then processed the RAW files in ACR 5.4, once using srgb and once using Adobe 98. When opened in Photoshop CS4, the colors in the images do no look like the colors in the jpg files from the camera.
For the image shot with the camera set to srgb, if I process the RAW nef with ACR 5.4 set to srgb and open the processed NEF in Photoshop CS4 the colors are very different from the in-camera jpg, and there appears to be no way to get the colors close to the jpg from the camera. For the same image shot with the camera set to srgb, if I process the RAW nef with ACR 5.4 set to Adobe RGB 98 and open the processed NEF in Photoshop CS4, and then assign (assign, not convert) the processed NEF the srgb color profile, the image is very close to the jpg from the camera, which I verified by doing a difference.
For the image shot with the camera set to Adobe RGB 98, if I process the RAW NEF with ACR 5.4 set to Adobe RGB 98 and open the processed NEF in Photoshop CS4 the colors are very different from the in-camera jpg. If I now assign the profile srgb to the processed NEF, the result is very close to the jpg image from the camera (with Adobe RGB 98!).
This is very confusing.
Any explanations.

Thanks for your replies I do indeed want Adobe to read and USE the metadata. If so many others also want it, and if flags are set in the metadata,. it's surely not beyond the wit of a huge software house to read those settings and apply them.
I took the trouble to search through several threads and found no adequate explanation for why Adobe is disdaining the needs of its customers.
In many respects LR3 and PS12 aregreat products but they could be vastly more productive and useful to far more peolple if they improved workflow by using these settings. At the very minimum they could refrain from ignoring the preview jpeg - if Microsoft and Mac etc are able to display and print images correctly using the nef codec I fail to see why Adobe with all its expertise in imagery can not.
Nikon have a substaintial proportion of the DSLR ,enthusiast and professional market which are at the heart of Adobe's target audience. Why would Adobe wish to alienate such an important group of potential customers ?
Thanks - Alaeia

Camera Raw 4.6 Color Conversion Issues

I'm using CS3. In the Camera Raw 4.6 import window the color looks great. When I get the image into Photoshop the color looks horrible. I know it's the color profile that Raw is assigning. My question... is there a way to disable the color profile conversion coming from Camera Raw?
I've always had great results without using profiles and now this alters my color. I've even tried to go in and force the image to use a different color profile but at this point the damage has been done by the camera raw plugin.

"I've been doing professional color correction for about 15 years and know how to use the programs without the use of color profiles."
You're always using profiles no matter what, both a source and and destination for everything from your monitor to working RGB, CMYK and Lab to output profiles for proofing and print.
You need good profiles to define the hardware devices and color spaces. Without them, it's all only a guess.
"When I say "great color", I mean to say Photoshop doesn't adjust my color with profiles because I have profiles disabled."
There's not really a way to disable profiles in Photoshop. You can sort of turn them off, but the default profiles in your Color Settings dialog are still in effect no matter what. In fact, you can't even display in image in RGB or CMYK without at least two profile, and more often three.
Just having profile in the loop doesn't mean that Photoshop will "adjust" your colors. Photoshop will only do what you tell it to do.
"My monitor is corrected and I have no need to use profiles since I understand UCR & GCR conversion for printing."
You monitor is corrected? How? Have you calibrated it? After the calibration Photoshop needs, you guessed it, a monitor profile, in order to properly display your images. And how to you get from the RGB of your digital captures to the CMYK you need for offset? Yeah. Profiles. Even if you're using the archaic and outdated Custom CMYK to set your total ink and black generation, you are still in effect, using profiles. You are using the parameters defined there in the same way custom measurement are used in ProfileMaker to generate a custom ICC profile. It's just not as accurate.
"Also, when I have something printed somewhere I have them disable their profiles to provide true color. And I also force acrobat to use my color maps when building pdfs so my printer has no need for conversion of any kind."
How you do know you've made the right conversion for that printer. Most printer just ignore embedded profiles anyway, but including proper output profiles can enable them to display the files correctly on their calibrated screens, and for the more advanced printers, that embedded profile can allow them to use Device Link Profiles to convert your files to custom press or proofing profiles.
"My complaint was that the Camera Raw Plug-in forces me to convert to a profile with 4 possible choices. I was asking if there is a way to disable this?"
It's actually a choice of four different profiles not a profile with four choices. The choices are based on color gamut and gamma in order of increased gamut. There is no way to disable them. What would you put in their place? There are raw converters that will let you convert the raw data to any color space on output, including CMYK. Maybe that would be more appropriate for you. CaptureOne and Raw Developer are the two that come to mind, but they all use profiles.
Hell, even in the golden age of the drum scanner, scanners like the Hell 3010 without even being able to see an image on screen, used profiles, only they called them by a different name - lookup tables. Lookup tables for scanner input and characteristic lookup tables for the analog proofing system the house used.
"I found if I convert using the Adobe 1998 profile the color comes out close, I simply have to increase the saturation to return to the original optical image values. I would however like to bypass this step."
It sounds to me like you need to spend a few weeks getting up to date with the tools that are available now. Between hardware monitor calibration and custom CMYK output profiles that take into account different ink limits and black generation, you're missing out on a boatload of fun.
A lot of things have changed in prepress in the last fifteen years not the least of which is that little number called Direct to Plate. Since everone has gone DTP, the one thing that has gone by the wayside are any kind of overall proofing standards. Where you used to be able to send the same file to ten different printers and get back proofs that were extremely close, now they're all over the map. The only way to effectively deal with this is with custom profiles for the high end digital proofers that printers use today.
Sure, you still need to take into account the specifics of total ink, highlight and shadow values, but you simply can't rely on the positively ancient ink definitions in Custom CMYK to work very well for any of today's output. Unless, of course, you and your clients don't mind going through rounds and rounds of proofs.

Color Difference - Camera Raw & Nikon Raw NEF

Hello everybody
When i open a Nikon Raw file in Camera Raw (Photosop CC) I notice a distinct color-difference between the integrated preview image in the Raw file and the camera Raw standard.
I want to start with the exact same color how it came from the camera.
Refers to Nikon D300 or D800 in Raw / Nef format.
left, from Camera Raw 8.4.1 "Camera Raw Standard"
right, integrated preview from the original raw-file
Mostly i have the difference in Blue, it's too much cyan in there an looks not "natural"!
thanks for help

The third icon in from the right (looks like a camera) called camera calibrations is where the presets live that supposedly match that of your camera.
Even though you use those presets, you are not done. To match what you see in your camera, you must manually adjust the sliders under the basic tab until it does match.
What you see in your camera is a processed image, which is applied to a jpg only. The raw file is just that raw, no processing is done to it. Think of it as a negative. It is your permanent record of the image. Camera raw is then used to manually set up the image to your personal liking. Which does a better job the camera or yourself, is dependent on your skills. You can get details out of that raw file that the camera can not.
When you find you are placing the sliders in certain location more than once, then it is time to create a preset in camera raw that stores those settings. The more you use camera raw, more you can see when your own preset can be used (even as a starting point) and when it is time to do everything manually.
So in other words it is going to take time to 1)get a keen eye 2)understand the subtle differences in what each setting does and 3) collect a library of presets that you can use time and again.

Getting Camera RAW 4.1 to leave things alone

Maybe there is a direct answer to this question somewhere on the forum, but I have been searching without much luck. Maybe someone has a concise answer out there...
How do I get Camera RAW 4.1 to USE all of my in camera settings, and then how do I most effectively open those files into PS3 for image processing (changing them into PSD) for any editing they may need?
My images are what I am looking for when they come out of the camera, and when I preview them in Bridge. It's only when the NEFs get opened into camera RAW 4.1 that they lose all their settings, and thus saturation, depth, contrast, etc.
I have heard about saving settings and profiles, but I am talking about thousands of photos in each shoot, with wildly different elements to them all. I work hard to make sure most everything is well set and executed in the camera when I shoot, so it is disheartening to have to "edit" which seems to mean just re-build everything I originally captured via in camera settings. Furthermore, it seems that this editing is very time consuming and rarely matches what I see if the previews.
I just want ACR's converter to not assume I didn't pay any attention to my in camera settings, and that I want to actually "edit" each photo in its interface. Thanks ahead of time for any help or suggestions that you might have. If it helps, I am shooting with D200s and D70s.

These issues have been covered here before many times. Just do a forum search.
In a nutshell:
This has been covered ad nauseam here. Please do a forum search.
Camera manufacturers, Canon and Nikon in particular, perform in-camera RAW to JPEG conversions designed to generate the over-saturated, over-contrasty and over-sharpened images that appeal to most amateurs.
Their stand-alone RAW conversion software also performs the same conversion to your RAW images.
Noise is also hidden by compressing the shadows so you don't see much of the noise inherent in the image.
Adobe Camera Raw, ACR, on the other hand, comes with default settings designed to give you the most detail possible (even if this sometimes means revealing some of the noise hidden by the camera manufacturers in their RAW conversion software), as well as the most natural images.
That being said, you can calibrate your camera to ACR and come up with your own settings to produce exactly what you want, including the JPEG-look of the camera manufacturer, and save that as your profile.
The key is to learn how to use ACR properly and to calibrate your camera to ACR.
CLICK HERE for some essential reading. (Revised edition for ACR 4.x by Jeff Schewe shipping soon.)
The ACR defaults are nothing more than a suggested starting point.
The color temperature won't necessarily match either.

Significant reduction in file size from Camera Raw to DNG

Hi,
I am currently testing the conversion of Leaf camera raw files into DNGs for a photographer's archive. I am hoping to convert all of the mos files to DNGs because Leaf Capture and the Leaf Raw Converter are not being updated and because the photographer wants to have an Adobe centered workflow. In my testing I discovered that converting mos files to DNGs through ACR 8.4 and LightRoom 5.4 resulted in a reduction of file size by nearly 50%. A 44.5MB mos file became a 23.6MB DNG. From what I've read only about 15-20% of the camera raw file should be lost and all of the data lost should be propietary.
Here-in lies my quesiton, is there any way that I can track or determine exactly what sort of compression is being done to the mos file and what information is or is not travelling in the conversion to DNG?
These are the settings I have used for converting raw files to DNGs:
ACR:
JPEG Preview: Medium Size
Embed fast load data
Don't use lossy compression
Preserve pixel counts
Don't embed original
LIGHTROOM 5.4:
Only Convert Raw files
Delete originals after successful conversion
File Extension DNG
Compatibility Camera Raw 7.1 and later
Jpeg Preview Medium Size
Embed Fast Load Data
Thanks!

50%? - I thought we were talking about 15-20%?
In my first post I questioned why I was seeing a reduction in file size of 50% when according to forums and articles I've read I should only be seing a 15-20% reduction in file size. I then wondered what data I might be losing, which you addressed.
Same as what? - what were the results.
I was referring to testing I preformed on camera raw files produced during different years (all mos). I converted all files with the same ACR and LR settings and found that the DNGs always reflected a 50% reduction in file size. This test suggests that any conversion issues is not necessarily related to how the camera raw files might have been differently built across years.
Adobe's raw data compression is touted by DNG zealots, but I haven't scrutinized it enough to corroborate or refute.., but my experience is that reduction is relatively marginal. All of this assumes original is also compressed - if uncompressed in original source, savings would be large.
The files I am dealing with are definitely uncompressed which could account for the large reduction in file size. I didn't realize until I posted to this thread that converting to a DNG results in a compression of the original image data. I understand that this compression is supposed to be lossless like a lossless compression to a tiff and thus result in no decrease in image quality or harm to the original image. I am baffled by how it is possible that any compression of a file (especially by 50%) could not result in a loss of important data but I will accept that it is possible to have a truly lossless compression and that the size reduction I am seeing could be a result of all of the different processes a file undergoes that you have outlined.
I looked into the effects that backwards compatibility has on the conversion process which might interest you http://dpbestflow.org/DNG#backwards-compatibility
I also posted to luminous landscape's forums http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=89101.new;topicseen#new
Although it wouldn't surprise me if the DNG conversion process tossed the xmp-like metadata, and kept the original stuff, but it would surprise me if it tossed the original stuff - but as I said before, I haven't scrutinized for completeness so I don't know.
I've done testing in which I converted .mos camera raw files with their sidecar xmps and without their sidecar xmps. My tests revealed that the DNG definitely carries over xmp metadata although it is not clear to me exactly how it is carried and if anything is lost.

10.4.7 and Photoshop CS2, Adobe Camera Raw.

Since updating to 10.4.7 Adobe Bridge will not build thumbnails of DNG files and only builds 1/6th size thumbnails of NEF files. The Camera Raw Plug-in is in the correct folder but Bridge will not show Camera Raw Preferences. All Adobe troubleshooting has been followed with no success, purging cahes etc.. No problems prior to updating to 10.4.7 and the latest iTunes. Any suggestions.

There is no obvious reason why CS2 should not run on your G4. Have you kept the CS2 up to date? Updated Quicktime? Kept 10.4.7 up to date?
There have been known issues which recent (over the last 2-3 months) updates from both Apple and Adobe are said to have resolved.
One obvious suspect is third party plug-ins. Have you tried disabling them (if you have any), and then re-enabling them one by one to see if this makes a difference?
You could also try the Adobe's own forum: http://www.adobe.com/support/forums/index.html although it can be hard to navigate!

Why can't I send older RAW files from iPhoto to Adobe Camera RAW?

I have a 20" Intel iMac (OS X 10.5.8) and use iPhoto '09 (Version 8.1.2) for storing and organizing the digital images produced by my Nikon D200 and D700 cameras. When I wish to edit a photo I right click on the image and select Edit in External Editor. The external editor is Photoshop Elements 6 for Mac.
In iPhoto/Preferences/Advanced for RAW Photos I have checked "Use RAW when using external editor." Recently I successfully sent new D200 and D700 RAW images from iPhoto to PSE 6 for conversion by Adobe Camera RAW (Version 5.4.0.57). However, I was not successful in attempting to do the same thing with older D200 RAW images taken more than three years ago. In all cases what showed up in ACR were JPEGs rather than the RAW images. I don't understand why this is happening. What is needed to resolve this issue? Any remedial information will be appreciated.
Bob

Well all of that tells us that the Library is sound and not corrupt - which is good news.
Now the question would seem to be 'Why isn't iPhoto respecting the settings you've chosen in the Preferences?"
Try trash the com.apple.iPhoto.plist file from the HD/Users/ Your Name / library / preferences folder. (Remember you'll need to reset your User options afterwards. These include minor settings like the window colour and so on. Note: If you've moved your library you'll need to point iPhoto at it again.)
What's the plist file?
For new users: Every application on your Mac has an accompanying plist file. It records certain User choices. For instance, in your favourite Word Processor it remembers your choice of Default Font, on your Web Browser is remembers things like your choice of Home Page. It even recalls what windows you had open last if your app allows you to pick up from where you left off last. The iPhoto plist file remembers things like the location of the Library, your choice of background colour, whether you are running a Referenced or Managed Library, what preferences you have for autosplitting events and so on. Trashing the plist file forces the app to generate a new one on the next launch, and this restores things to the Factory Defaults. Hence, if you've changed any of these things you'll need to reset them. If you haven't, then no bother. Trashing the plist file is Mac troubleshooting 101.
Regards
TD

Camera Profiles in Camera RAW

I just came back from a shoot at the Bosque del Apache NWR and discovered that my D3X NEF files do not have a camera profile pn the Camera Calibration Tab in Camera RAW. The only thing in the profile pulldown is MATRIX and there should at least 6-7 different profiles. My D300 files have all of the profiles in Camera RAW. I even went back to NEF files that had Camera RAW profiles and they are missing as well. I am currently running Camera RAW v6.6.
What gives? How do I get the profiles back?
Thanks in advance.
John Munro

Here's the link to the Adobe Camera Raw forum:
Adobe Camera Raw
Wo Tai Lao Le
我太老了

Camera Raw blu image with white x in it. Does not show real image

Does anybody know about this? Just installed Photoshop CC 2014 with Camera Raw and now i do not see the NEF imported image in camera raw?
Do i miss a extra plugin maybe?
thanks for the help

Turn off GPU Acceleration in the CR Preferences. This X happens if ACR gets an error trying to render things using the GPU.

Quality of NEF conversion/demosaicization in Camera Raw

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for