It is currently Sun Aug 09, 2020 12:14 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
 Help on RAW files 
Author Message

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:17 am
Posts: 9
Post Help on RAW files
Im just curious about using RAW, ive noticed a lot of poeple shoot using it, but just wondered with time lapses how the ifile sizes are reduced, i mean if you do like a 30 sec vid of something, then surely the file sizes must be huge given RAW images in general larger files?

Also, what do you use to open these files? I have no idea at all, my camera has the function but never used it before.

Cheers

Davie


Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:06 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:01 am
Posts: 88
Location: Plovidv / Bulgaria
Post Re: Help on RAW files
In general the RAW images gives you flexibility to edit the certain settings of your photo such as exposure, clarity, white balance and a ton more after you actually shot the photo. This is limited in jpegs.
Most people do exactly this in post production and then safe it to jpegs or whatever they need...
I am using photoshop to edit raw images, for viewing i am using FastStone Image Viewer.


Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:52 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:07 am
Posts: 629
Location: Sydney
Post Re: Help on RAW files
Each of my raw files are around 23mb, then once converted to a tiff is around 126mb, i got no idea why tiffs are 5x the size can anyone tell me? So with around 500 stills this takes up alot of room but once ive exported a approx 20sec movie out of After Effects the total size is only around 300mb. Then i delete the tiffs. (Adobe Lightroom to open and work the stills)

_________________
Cinematographer & Time-lapse Photographer
http://www.driftwoodcinema.com


Wed Oct 20, 2010 12:03 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:01 am
Posts: 88
Location: Plovidv / Bulgaria
Post Re: Help on RAW files
Owen wrote:
Each of my raw files are around 23mb, then once converted to a tiff is around 126mb, i got no idea why tiffs are 5x the size can anyone tell me? So with around 500 stills this takes up alot of room but once ive exported a approx 20sec movie out of After Effects the total size is only around 300mb. Then i delete the tiffs. (Adobe Lightroom to open and work the stills)

Tiff is lossless format but in general when is "compressed" the quality is the same as the source but smaller.
For example Lossless compression keeps all of the detail of the original image (Lossless algorithms are generally better for line art, images that contain significant areas of exactly the same color, background color, text and so on.:

BITMAP = 123444432347777779 = 20MiB of sapce
TIFF = 1234[4]32347[6]9 = 16MiB of space (kind of compression example)

Tiff files get little smaller but all the information is still there.
All depends what compression method you use, LZW is most effective when compressing solid indexed colors (graphics as you see above), and is less effective for 24 bit continuous photo images...
In your case you might switch the image mode to "8 bits/channel" before the save without including the "layers" you will probably gets identical file sizes as the raw images, but not 5x times bigger...its pointless..


Wed Oct 20, 2010 1:56 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:07 am
Posts: 629
Location: Sydney
Post Re: Help on RAW files
salti wrote:
Owen wrote:
Each of my raw files are around 23mb, then once converted to a tiff is around 126mb, i got no idea why tiffs are 5x the size can anyone tell me? So with around 500 stills this takes up alot of room but once ive exported a approx 20sec movie out of After Effects the total size is only around 300mb. Then i delete the tiffs. (Adobe Lightroom to open and work the stills)

Tiff is lossless format but in general when is "compressed" the quality is the same as the source but smaller.
For example Lossless compression keeps all of the detail of the original image (Lossless algorithms are generally better for line art, images that contain significant areas of exactly the same color, background color, text and so on.:

BITMAP = 123444432347777779 = 20MiB of sapce
TIFF = 1234[4]32347[6]9 = 16MiB of space (kind of compression example)

Tiff files get little smaller but all the information is still there.
All depends what compression method you use, LZW is most effective when compressing solid indexed colors (graphics as you see above), and is less effective for 24 bit continuous photo images...
In your case you might switch the image mode to "8 bits/channel" before the save without including the "layers" you will probably gets identical file sizes as the raw images, but not 5x times bigger...its pointless..



Ok thanks. I honestly got no idea what any of that means but i will take your advive and switch to 8 bit. I think i might need to study up on all this lossless and bit talk.

Thanks again

_________________
Cinematographer & Time-lapse Photographer
http://www.driftwoodcinema.com


Wed Oct 20, 2010 3:04 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 43
Location: Los Angeles
Post Re: Help on RAW files
I shoot RAW about half the time for Time Lapse. (all the time for photos) For Time Lapses my RAW work flow is to import the RAW files into Lightroom where I make any adjustments to the images that I want. I then export the images as 4000 pixel wide JPEGs. I shoot with a Canon 5D mk2 so this is scaling them down a little bit. I bring the JPEG into After Effects to make my movie, In after Effects I work at 1080p at 29.97fps. Render my movies to QuickTime using the PhotoJPEG codec at 95%. This creates movies that look good, plays smoothly on most computers, is not too big, and you can scrub through forwards or backwards.

The reason I scale the images down to 4000 pixels wide is that After Effects CS4 sometimes has memory problems if you're working with full size 5D mk2 images.

_________________
Forrest Brown
http://www.forrestbrown.com/
http://www.forrestbrown.com/blog/


Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:46 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:17 am
Posts: 9
Post Re: Help on RAW files
It looks like there is maybe quite a bit i have to learn once ive done all the photos to assemble a video, its certainly going to be a learning process, im sure ill encounter problems as i go along!!


Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:56 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:15 pm
Posts: 832
Location: Middle Earth
Post Re: Help on RAW files
Understanding Raw Files, this may help you.............
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutor ... iles.shtml

_________________
Cloud hidden, whereabouts unknown …....YouTube channel 360timeimages
Canon 5D MkII, Canon 50D, EF 15 f/2.8 Fisheye, EF 24-105 f/4 L, Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AF-D, EF 100 f/2.8 Macro, EF 300 f/4 L, PClix,


Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:05 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:54 pm
Posts: 888
Location: Aars, Denmark
Post Re: Help on RAW files
davie_b1972 wrote:
Im just curious about using RAW, ive noticed a lot of poeple shoot using it, but just wondered with time lapses how the ifile sizes are reduced, i mean if you do like a 30 sec vid of something, then surely the file sizes must be huge given RAW images in general larger files?

When you render the video from your still images you need to choose settings that determine how compressed the final output will be (kb/sec of video). The file size of the resulting video depends only on those settings, not the size of the original photos.

The video compression you need to do in the end is much heavier and more detrimental than jpg compression. You might then ask, why shoot RAW at all if you're just going to throw all the extra data away in the end anyway? The answer is that RAW allows you to wait deciding on what data to throw away until the very end when you've seen the footage on a big screen and played around with editing it. With JPG you're throwing away a lot of the data immediately, giving you less freedom when editing.

Now the million dollar question that people disagree on is how much better you can make your footage look with RAW. My answer is that if you use appropriate camera settings (in particular white balance) there generally won't be a noticeable difference in your end product. Others will disagree so try both and see for yourself.

Frankly, my advise to you would be not to worry about RAW at this point. There are other things that are more important for you to learn about timelapse shooting than RAW vs. JPG, and the best way to learn is to practice. JPGs will serve you just fine for practicing and will be a lot simpler/faster for you to deal with in post processing. The less time you have to spend processing each shot, the more shots you are likely to make and the faster you will improve on the things that really matter. My $.02. :-)

_________________
Nikon D3s, D600, Canon 5D II, S3, SX100.
Feature film Beneath the Aurora on Vimeo.


Thu Oct 21, 2010 2:33 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:17 am
Posts: 9
Post Re: Help on RAW files
flyvholm, thanks for that, i think that will be the best way to go around it at this point, im sure im going to be making mistakes at first so its more experimental at this moment.

Can you tell me how you go about things, like what software you use etc?

I have read that 24 photos per second for timelaspe is recommended,, is that what you use or does it depend on what your doing?

Davie


Thu Oct 21, 2010 4:28 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:54 pm
Posts: 888
Location: Aars, Denmark
Post Re: Help on RAW files
I started out with VirtualDub which is a small free application that will work fine for just combining your photos into a video (I still use it for that). That's Windows only though, if you're on a Mac you'll probably want to look into QuickTime instead (can't be of much help there). There is however a rough guide to get you started in VirtualDub here. Where VirtualDub falls short is when you want to add music, text and other more advanced editing. When that time comes you may want to look into something like Adobe Premiere Elements.

The frame rate of your video is no big deal either as long as you're just playing the video on a computer. It just needs to be high enough that the video doesn't look stuttery. But yes, I think most people use 24 fps and I do too. The other frequently used frame rate is 30 fps and will make your video go a little faster, and perhaps you can see a slight difference in how fluent the video appears. Try either and make your pick. :-)

_________________
Nikon D3s, D600, Canon 5D II, S3, SX100.
Feature film Beneath the Aurora on Vimeo.


Thu Oct 21, 2010 5:17 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:17 am
Posts: 9
Post Re: Help on RAW files
Flyvolm, thanks again, ill try Virtual dub and see how i do with that, Im assuming i can use that then import the file into Adobe Premiere Elements then add music there?

I want to do a time lapse of lima, starting with sunrise, and try to capture everyday life like poeple going to work, traffic, maybe construction workers, so its going to take time, and i cant really do sunrise and sunsets for at least 7 weeks so i have the chance to capture some of the other stuff before doing that.

At 24fps, im looking to have each clip lasting for 7 seconds, how long it lasts im not too sure yet, depending on how much i put into it, but at least 2-3 mins would be nice, so its (for me) a fairly big project, are there things i sould consider as i havent even done one before?

What i dont want is to start it then realise ive overlooked something!!


Thu Oct 21, 2010 8:23 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:31 pm
Posts: 372
Post Re: Help on RAW files
Quote:
Frankly, my advise to you would be not to worry about RAW at this point. There are other things that are more important for you to learn about timelapse shooting than RAW vs. JPG, and the best way to learn is to practice. JPGs will serve you just fine for practicing and will be a lot simpler/faster for you to deal with in post processing. The less time you have to spend processing each shot, the more shots you are likely to make and the faster you will improve on the things that really matter. My $.02. :-)

very good advice

Quote:
The frame rate of your video is no big deal either as long as you're just playing the video on a computer. It just needs to be high enough that the video doesn't look stuttery. But yes, I think most people use 24 fps and I do too. The other frequently used frame rate is 30 fps and will make your video go a little faster, and perhaps you can see a slight difference in how fluent the video appears. Try either and make your pick. :-)

But if you're creating numerous smaller movies that you will eventually compile into one larger movie it makes life easier if you pick either 24 or 30 and do them all the same. That way you won't have frame rate issues latter.


Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:09 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:17 am
Posts: 9
Post Re: Help on RAW files
All good advice here thanks to everyone who has contributed :-)

The only issue shooting wise is that my finepix S9500 might limit me to shooting at night, ill need still shots of cars passing by and im not sure if my camera has it in it to do this!!


Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:42 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:01 am
Posts: 88
Location: Plovidv / Bulgaria
Post Re: Help on RAW files
You have everything you need! Relax go on the field and test! Good Luck! :)


Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:29 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:54 pm
Posts: 888
Location: Aars, Denmark
Post Re: Help on RAW files
davie_b1972 wrote:
Flyvolm, thanks again, ill try Virtual dub and see how i do with that, Im assuming i can use that then import the file into Adobe Premiere Elements then add music there?

That should be possible, yes. If you have Premiere Elements you may want to do most if not all of your editing there to simplify the workflow. Some clips may benefit from running them through VirtualDub though. In particular, you'll probably run into flicker. You'd have to shoot full manual and at max aperture to completely avoid it, and do that for as far as you can - but unfortunately it's not always possible. The deflicker filters in VirtualDub (Graft or MSU) should be able to reduce the flicker significantly if not remove it completely. The alternative would be to get GBDeflicker for Premiere Elements ($99). Another VirtualDub filter that can come handy is Deshaker which can stabilize your footage in case of camera shake. If you end up needing to use VirtualDub for processing some clips, output them in high quality (preferably uncompressed if you have disk space for it) for importing into Premiere Elements.

davie_b1972 wrote:
What i dont want is to start it then realise ive overlooked something!!

Mistakes are bound to happen, but try to look at them as your ticket to learning and improving. ;-) You'll eventually get the mistakes out of the way so you can start collecting good quality footage. The more footage you have to choose from, the easier it will be to put the final project together, so in other words... go ahead and start shooting. It's the only way to really learn what works and what doesn't. That goes for trying night shooting as well. I think your camera should be okay for shooting city lights and traffic at night, looks like you can go to ISO400 without excessive noise. Give it a shot.

_________________
Nikon D3s, D600, Canon 5D II, S3, SX100.
Feature film Beneath the Aurora on Vimeo.


Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:00 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore. pozycjonowanie