D40 NEF + JPEG Fine?

[jhpope]

I've recently started shotting in .nef raw format with my D40. I am a lossless freak. All my back-up cd's are .flac where possible. Memory and Hard Disk space just isn't at a premium anymore and I don't feel the need to take an unnecessary loss of quality.

Before I was shotting in JPEG Fine quality. In order to share my pictures with family and friends and upload to flickr you need .jpg files. I can batch convert them with photoshop but I would love it if the D40 would do NEF + JPEG Fine instead of + Basic.

So what I'm getting at is...Is there anyway to get + Fine with the D40 or does/will Nikon have any plans to include this with a Firmware update? It's just an option that you can choose not to use if you don't want...I however would love it. Though I could see Nikon not wanting to do this as it would slow the FPS you could shoot. But if you're knowledgeable enough to choose + Fine, then you probably know you're going to take that performance hit.

[ELAY]

I don't have an answer to your question, I'm afraid.

But let me ask you this -- for flickr/sharing purposes, where it is impractical to view anything above large, isn't basic good enough?

And if you are processing your RAW files, can't you just output big .jpgs anyway while you are at it? Doesn't seem like too big an additional step.

EL

[kirbinster]

I have a D40 and the only option is Raw/ +Basic for jpeg. Sorry, I guess you have to buy a more expensive model to get what you want.

But I have a question for you that I was going to ask separately. What is the purpose of shooting raw and also storing a jpeg? As you said it is easy enough to do a "save-as" to create a jpeg, and it just seems to waste storage space on the memory card and take longer to download and review.

What am I missing - why would you want to save both - I'm sure there must be a good reason, but I have not figured it out yet.

[jhpope]

Yeah, I suppose my request is more specific to my personal preferences than I thought. How can I explain?

With my music, I like to have the original CD or .flac, which is lossless and analogous to .nef files. But on my iPod, I use .mp3's encoded at V0 with LAME, analogous to JPEG Fine.

Maybe I'm just a quality nazi. I can and do convert the .nef files to .jpg at quality level 12 with photoshop, but I guess I just feel it would be easier to have it done at the time the photo is taken.

I like to upload full res images to flickr kind of as a cheap easy insurance policy on my photos, in case something goes horribly wrong with my HD and/or DVD backups.

I guess I would just like both to be created at the same time on the camera because it would be easier and I'm lazy.

[ELAY]

Fair enough.

But here is what I don't get. If you are processing your RAW files, then presumably you are going to want to save/backup/share your files after processing. So for those shots, Fine out of the camera wouldn't cut it -- because you would be posting/saving the unprocessed shots. So I think even if you captured RAW+jpg, you would end up having to convert anything you processed anyway, no?

EL

[jhpope]

Hmmm...this is beginning to make me look like an anal retentive redundancy freak. The process I use is to import my .nef files from my memory card into a .nef folder in a dated folder. The .nef files are then converted to .jpeg's and put into a .jpeg folder in the dated folder. Then if I need to edit anything, I open up the .nef, edit it, and save as a .jpeg into an edited folder in the dated folder.

Maybe a little overkill, but like I said, storage is so cheap these days. I won't say my process makes the most sense, maybe I should re-evaluate it.

[wulf]

I think there is some way you can get round it by taking RAW shots and then applying an in-camera effect. Set the effect so it makes no change to the result and you end up with a fine quality JPEG copy. Or something...

Sorry I'm a bit hazy, but I have't tried this yet. It may or may not be quicker than generating the JPEG files once you get the RAW files off the camera.

Wulf

[jdepould]

You aren't going to upload .nef files to the web, I'm going to go with ELAY here and say just export as jpeg after post. It'll save card space and you'll end up with a better looking jpeg when you're done and still have the .nef archived in whatever program you use.

What RAW workflow are you using? That could be half your problem right there.

RAW files must be post-processed, even if it's just to default contrast and brightness. They aren't meant to be taken and used straight out of the camera.

[jhpope]

When I convert my .nef files through bridge with photoshop, the result is a photo with 230dpi. When I shoot in JPEG Fine it comes out of the camera at 300dpi. Any reason why? And is the jpeg file better when it is straight converted from a .nef, or when it comes straight out of the camera at JPEG Fine setting?

[jdepould]

When I convert my .nef files through bridge with photoshop, the result is a photo with 230dpi. When I shoot in JPEG Fine it comes out of the camera at 300dpi. Any reason why? And is the jpeg file better when it is straight converted from a .nef, or when it comes straight out of the camera at JPEG Fine setting?

dpi doesn't mean much until you start sending files to a printer.

Better is pretty subjective, you have less wiggle room when you shoot in jpeg. Shooting in RAW and then converting with a computer gives you more options.