Jump to content

Recommended Posts

HEIF was introduced a while back as a new format, some folks thought it would be a good replacement for JPEG for images on the internet and whatnot. It does indeed take up less space. So far, so good.

Initially, there was not much support from hardware makers, but nowadays, it is gaining in popularity, more and more hardware makers are including it as an export option along with raw, tiff, jpg, etc.

Be very careful about using HEIF as an export option for storage, it has a problem, it is engineered so that the only color space “you” can use is sRGB. “You” cannot override this and use AdobeRGB or DCI-P3, or any other color-space.

So, what is the problem? Most of the web-sites and email and all of that internet stuff uses sRGB, right?

Not really, there are a lot of places that use other color spaces. Printing and video for example.

Without getting into a massively distracting sidetrack on color spaces and how to deal with differences, some things that can happen if you try to move between them is color saturation is destroyed or banding happens. Color space issues make for long hours at work and sometimes cannot be resolved to everyone’s satisfaction.

It is looking like HEIF is a short term solution for sending images over the internet to older cell phones. Older phones have screens set up in the sRGB space, newer ones are using the DCI-P3 space, a wider space similar to AdobeRGB.

So be cautious about using HEIF as a storage format, you may want to keep the raw image around as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Greybeard said:

Interesting thoughts - but isn’t heif really an alternative to jpg rather than raw?

It is thought about that way, I mentioned that in the first rambling paragraph. JPG still has the ability to use more color spaces, while heif does not, so the only value in heif is smaller files being sent over cell networks to older phones.

It (heif) unfortunately is not a good replacement for storing and using versus full jpg files in place of raw files as some do. For storing, either raw or tiff or full jpg is much better. edit: DNG should be in there for the Adobe fans.

edit 2: Hopefully to make that more clear, if you set your camera to use AdobeRGB or ProPhotoRGB (for those cameras that support things like that) but save the file as something other than raw, be careful about using HEIF, if you do use it thinking you will save space, the colorspace in the saved file will be sRGB, because that is how the format is engineered. If you want to use that file for printing or for video work, weeellll, best wishes.

Edited by jerryy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jerryy, Greybeard, interesting thoughts. I’d never consider not keeping the raws + their edits (in my case in C1). I make the jpegs from them as needed for a particular use (like for printing at a certain size on a certain paper or for the web etc.) I think of them as disposable or single-purpose files. But your post makes me wonder what will happen when me and/or my C1 is no longer there, when no one is there to continue using the images this way. I should start making an archive in some generally useful jpeg version (or teach at least one of my three sons to use my C1 environment so that they can get to the images they may want in the future). In the older days (before Fujifilm, on Canon) that is what I did (I mean the general jpegs besides keeping the raw). In the excitement from the journey from Canon to mirrorless, X-Trans, all the different raw sw (Silkypix etc. etc.), up to current C1 with the fantastic possibilities and image quality… this aspect got out of my sight. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • A fungus in the forest.

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

      (p.s. Open Topic.)  
    • The backslashes you are referring are just symbols denoting path.  Once you import into these LUTS into Davinci Resolve those backslashes are removed by default and you only see is the true file name which has no backslashes.  Convince yourself of this by opening the LUT folder from the Davinci Resolve Project Settings.  Do you see any backslashes in those LUT names? Of course not.  The only name you see is the one that has the underscores and the periods. These LUTS work as designed without having to change any path names.  However, they need to be set up properly through CSTs and by what is supported in Davinci Resolve.  Hence, the FLog2C film simulation LUTS cannot be used because Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut color space and the FLog2C gamut. Alternatively, Davinci Resolve does support Flog2 film simulation LUTS because the color space for FLog2 is Rec 2020 and there is an FLog2 gamut. If all you are doing is changing the path names then you are not getting the correct results.
    • I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
×
×
  • Create New...