Timeline for RAWs looking massively different in Aperture/Mac OS Preview compared to camera preview and (Canon) PictureStyleEditor
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 2, 2013 at 20:30 | comment | added | Michael C | Any time an application is displaying a RAW file on an 8-bit monitor (the overwhelming vast majority of monitors on the planet), it is converting the RAW file to an 8-bit format for display. While it does not necessarily have to be jpeg, it does need to be an 8-bit per color channel format. | |
| Dec 19, 2012 at 8:56 | comment | added | Vincent Robert | RAW need to be converted to an image to be viewed. This image is just a bunch pixels. Since RAW processing is costly, these result pixels are often saved in one of the common image formats, most often JPEG. | |
| Dec 11, 2012 at 2:47 | comment | added | Evan Pak | Really? I remember reading that they do. | |
| Dec 10, 2012 at 23:43 | comment | added | Michael Nielsen | Raws don't need to be converted to jpg to be viewed. | |
| Dec 10, 2012 at 9:10 | comment | added | PattaFeuFeu | It helps to understand the “why is this happening”, but doesn’t make my pictures any more usable. If the pictures stay as they appear in Aperture, they are far away from being useful for me and I might as well trash them. :( | |
| Dec 10, 2012 at 2:46 | history | answered | Evan Pak | CC BY-SA 3.0 |