If RAW is an uncompressed file, why is TIFF so much larger…?
Raw files have metadata that describe the color information attached to each pixel while TIFF files have that data baked into the pixel information in all channels.
Well done."Raw" is uncooked. "Tuff" is overcooked. It's also a typo.
A 16-bit RAW file stores each sensel with about 15 bits of actual color intensity for a single color...a sensel is sensitive to Red or Green or Blue.
A 16-bit TIFF file has had RAW sensels converted to R-G-B pixel value, and each color has 15 bits (or 16)...three times as much information for one pixel.
From Blue Moon Camera…!A 16-bit RAW file stores each sensel with about 15 bits of actual color intensity for a single color...a sensel is sensitive to Red or Green or Blue.
A 16-bit TIFF file has had RAW sensels converted to R-G-B pixel value, and each color has 15 bits (or 16)...three times as much information for one pixel.
If RAW is an uncompressed file, why is TIFF so much larger…?
Don't confuse:
Encoding: RAW vs. several bitmap formats
Compression: compressed vs. uncompressed
Fidelity: lossless vs. lossy
Color resolution: bit depth, typically 8 or 16 bit per pixel
Several combinations occur in practice. A RAW file can be uncompressed lossless, compressed lossless or compressed lossy, nominally 16 bit but limited to what the camera sensor actually puts out (typically 12-13 bit). A TIFF file can be uncompressed or compressed lossless (ZIP usually), 8 or 16 bit. JPG is a compressed lossy format. JPG's more modern alternative, PNG, allows 8 or 16 bit and lossless compression.
There's of course a whole slew of additional formats for encoding image data.
Owners manual states the MD 262 shoots RAW only…!Many cameras store RAW with compression and sometimes offer this as an option to the user; Leica falls in that category (not sure which models, you could find that out by referring to the manual). RAW compression will typically be lossless. I don't know whether Leicas have RAW compression turned on or off by default.
Which is bigger thus depends on a whole slew of factors. Having said that, TIFF is usually exchanged in uncompressed format, which means that a single-layer 16-bit TIFF will have nominally 2 bytes * 3 colors = 6 bytes per pixel plus a bit of metadata overhead (negligible). Thus, a 24 megapixel RGB TIFF will be 6 * 24 = 144Mbytes. Due to its straightforward way of encoding, it has good cross-platform and backward compatibility; basically, nothing has ever changed in how uncompressed, single-layer TIFFs are encoded in the decades that the file format has been in existence. This is one of the reasons why it has remained so popular, despite its inefficiency.
Owners manual states the MD 262 shoots RAW only…!
I didn't state otherwise. According to documentation I can find online, the MD626 records in lossless compressed RAW format.
Again, I warn against conflating different things. RAW and compression and lossiness are three different things.
Your camera records in RAW format. At the same time, it's compressed, but without loss in image quality. This is part of the explanation why your RAW files are smaller than uncompressed TIFFs.
Does the Leica shoot in a RAW format then converts the image to loss-free JPEG…?
Do miss f#¥<, so simple…!
RAW implies raw sensor data (for all intents and purposes). When saving to JPEG, your camera will compress and format the data according to that standard. When saving as RAW, it'll do the same, but for the proprietary Leica DNG standard for files containing raw image data. I suspect the compression is the both in same cases, which helps simplify the camera firmware since the image processing chain can be virtually the same for both file types.
Well, we've been over that a few times; film also has its quirks.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?