Nikon D3 - NEF vs. TIF ??

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by William Jones, Jul 2, 2009.

  1. Assuming I don't care about larger file sizes and the resulting increased
    time to write the images to my CF card(s), can anyone tell me any
    disadvantages to shooting .TIF files instead of .NEF files in my D3?

    William Jones, Jul 2, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  2. William Jones

    Me Guest

    The Tif files from the D3 are 8 bit per RGB channel, not 16 (or 12 or 14
    as in the case of *.nef), so you lose one of the principle advantages of
    shooting raw in the first place. In-camera processing such as
    sharpening and noise reduction will also be applied, with default output
    much the same as what you'd get shooting jpeg. Those operations can't
    be "undone" from the tif file.
    Me, Jul 2, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  3. William Jones

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Your RAW files contain the RAW data as formed by the camera, plus the
    list of camera edit settings you have chosen. The edit settings have
    not modified the RAW data.

    Your TIFF files will be modified by the edit settings before being
    saved. You will get no list of edit settings.

    For this reason there will be less that you can do when editing the
    TIFF files than with the RAW files.

    Eric Stevens
    Eric Stevens, Jul 2, 2009
  4. Thank you!

    William Jones, Jul 2, 2009
  5. Thank you!

    William Jones, Jul 2, 2009
  6. Thank you!

    William Jones, Jul 2, 2009
  7. Less editing flexibility including adjusting sharpening and white balance
    during post processing and less ability to recover blown highlights in
    Lightroom, Capture NX, Aperture, etc..

    Think of the tiff files the same as jpeg file except without the compression
    and the resulting data loss. But like jpegs, you're letting the camera make
    major decisions about white balance, sharpening with less ability to
    correct those decisions afterwards on your computer.

    - Peter
    Peter Lawrence, Jul 2, 2009
  8. William Jones

    D-Mac Guest

    The new Nikon cameras have a feature called "D lighting" which can
    reduce the instances of blown highlights - the main reason you would
    shoot RAW is to prevent blowing highlights and blocking shadows. Dynamic
    range constraints.

    The RAW image captures what some people call "useless information". Any
    image data past 8 bit can't be printed on most printers and certainly
    can't be displayed on any but the most expensive monitors. You might
    well ask why bother then.

    Imagine editing a colour photo and not knowing how the data in the image
    past 8 bit is being manipulated and you start to do as I have and
    question the validity of being able to capture usable information as
    opposed to large amounts of information you have no use for.

    Tiff files are uncompressed image files. JPEGs are compressed image
    files. "D Lighting" at it's best will smooth out the dynamic range. If
    this is acceptable, then you need to choose JPEG or TIFF. The TIFF files
    will not have artefacts in them and the compressed JPEGs will. Typically
    you might expect twice as many JPEGs per card as TIFF files.

    I have done a lot of research into file types and their effect on
    printed images. JPEG artefacts are mostly only visible on a monitor at
    pixel size viewing. You won't generally see them in inkjet prints and
    seldom in prints up to native image size from photo labs.

    In Summary... Yes, most professional photographers capture RAW data in
    order to have maximum editability post shoot. Keep in mind most
    newspaper photographers are forbidden to shoot RAW due to the
    possibility of fraud when editing. For them TIFF is the file capture of
    choice. There is also the increased time to write large files to the
    flash card, reducing the number of continuous shots you can take.

    An example:
    I shoot with a D700 and companion Fuji s5 Pro. (a D200 in drag). The s5
    has the widest dynamic range of any digital camera on the market. I use
    that in jpeg capture mode and print directly from the camera at Wedding
    receptions and other events where instant sales are made. For that it is

    For bridal portraits, I use the D700 and capture RAW mode with a rather
    complex workflow post shoot. Only in extreme cases does shooting RAW
    with the D700 have any realisable benefit. I get most of my album fodder
    with the s5 and many of it's files get enlarged to mini and full poster

    A D3 is probably the best camera for shooting JPEG after the s5 you can
    buy at present. Wether this or TIFF capture is sufficient for your needs
    is up to you. I always work on the idea that enough is sufficient. Many
    people believe that there is never enough.
    D-Mac, Jul 2, 2009
  9. William Jones

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Well - piss off then. And take all your multiple personas with you.
    I'm sure we will all be happier.

    Eric Stevens
    Eric Stevens, Jul 2, 2009
  10. William Jones

    Me Guest

    Successful nym-shift trolling requires the ability to recognise when and
    how to change the bait when it's getting stale.
    Like photography, there's a bit of an art to it.
    If the reward was fish, then at least you'll never choke on a bone.
    Me, Jul 2, 2009
  11. William Jones

    Bob Larter Guest

    I'd suggest <>, but I expect
    you'd get yourself booted & banned in less than ten minutes.
    Bob Larter, Jul 2, 2009
  12. William Jones

    Bob Larter Guest

    He's fun to poke, though.
    Bob Larter, Jul 2, 2009
  13. I convert my NEF files using Capture NX from the D3 into 16-bit TIF files
    for editing in Photoshop CS2 (which won't open a D3 NEF file).

    Do I still lose all of this if I'm working the 16-bit TIF files?

    William Jones, Jul 2, 2009
  14. **** YOU, "Oh Gawd"

    William Jones, Jul 2, 2009
  15. Thank you kindly for the thoughtful reply.

    William Jones, Jul 2, 2009
  16. William Jones

    ray Guest

    Generally, you still have all the flexibility when you convert the raw
    file to an image format. You might want to look at ufraw for your
    conversions - has many good features.
    ray, Jul 2, 2009
  17. William Jones

    Shon Kei Guest

    There might be something in what you say but the over riding limitation
    of P&S cameras has nothing to do with software manipulation or some nerd
    writing software to tamper with the thing... It's the plastic lenses!

    Beside that. Any halfway decent Photo editing program - like photoslop,
    can artificially extend the dynamic range of an image as you go through
    sorting out the keepers and the throw aways. Hell even picasa can do it
    on the fly.
    Shon Kei, Jul 2, 2009
  18. Thank you Floyd. As always your posts are informative and most helpful.
    William Jones, Jul 3, 2009
  19. William Jones

    Bob Larter Guest

    Bob Larter, Jul 3, 2009
  20. Navas appears to be at least as much of a mindless asshole as Ow Gawd.

    Both of them sound like those guys who sit home alone at night doing strange
    things with small furry animals... :)
    William Jones, Jul 3, 2009
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.