Fast Raw to jpeg conversion and other raw work flow

[Roger Clark]

Hi,
Sometimes I shoot raw only, sometimes raw+jpeg and rarely (for snapshots) jpeg only. I archive jpegs and raw files (jpegs will always be readable). But with a 5D Mark II the raw files are large (25 to 39 megabytes), so space on cards is more important. So that means I'll shoot raw only more often. With Canon's digital photo professional, it is taking 1 minute per image to make a jpeg, and that is not viable for trying to review images. Do you create a set of jpegs while on a shoot, or only use programs like bridge to review images? If you create jpegs, what software do you use and how fast does it do it? If you don't create jpegs, what is your work flow?

I need change my work flow with these large files so wondering what you think is the best way is for you.
I'm particularly interested in people's experience with larger files like those from 5D Mark 2 or 1Ds Mark II cameras.

Roger

[Axel Hildebrandt]

I only use RAW, use Bridge to preview them, then ACR to adjust exposure etc. if necessary, convert to TIFF and after final processing in PS, I save as JPG. Doesn't take too long.

[Roger Clark]

Some additional details. When I use bridge cs4 on my laptop with 1D Mark II files, response is pretty good. When I click on an image in bridge to show the 100% zoom, it gives a low res view then snaps to full resolution in a second or two. But with 5D Mark II files, response is much slower. The low res view pops up immediately, but 10 to 15 seconds to get the full resolution view.

Conversion to jpegs: 5D mark II in canon photo professional took 1 minute per image at highest quality jpeg (generating 25 megabyte jpegs!) and at 80% quality, 35 to 40 seconds per image, and 20 megabyte jpegs.

Hmmm. Kinda like when I got my 500 mm lens--had to upgrade tripod and head. Now upgrade to 20+ megapixel camera, then upgrade laptop and memory cards.
Never ending cycle. ;-)

I'm still interested to know if there are faster solutions. This is going to be painful when on a photo shoot making 500 to 1000 images per day.

Roger

[Axel Hildebrandt]

It might be time to upgrade your computer hardware or maybe just add memory. On my computer PS opens 57MB TIFF files in a second or so. Saving a 1D3 RAW file as 57MB TIFF in ACR takes about 2 seconds.

[Charles Glatzer]

Breeze Browser is still the fastest program for viewing, as it does not create its own jpegs, but uses the embeded jpegs with the RAW file. Not sure if it can view the 5DII RAW images as of yet

Chas

[Jim Poor]

I've heard great things about "Instant JPG from Raw" http://www.mickbarr.com/onlinestore/slide_show.php?viewGallery=10000

[Roger Clark]

Thanks Axel, Chas, Jim,
On further research, it seems that bridge will work faster by telling it to use the embedded jpeg. This is not ideal but it is a quick button change to go from embedded jpeg to full resolution (at the cost of compute time). I want to be able to go to full resolution in order to check focus, to make sure after each session (back at the lodge) my technique is still good. (Plus it's nice to oooh and aaah!)

Reading tif files is very quick on my machines; the slowdown seems to be when trying to render a 5DII raw file in bridge CS4, or with canon's digital photo professional. Overall, I like bridge and the work flow it allows.

My laptop is a sony 1.7 GHz Pentiom M with 2 GBytes of ram. I also bought an Asus Eee PC HA1000 with 1 GB ram and 160 GB hard drive. Only 3.2 pounds and $390. Yes $390.
The display is LED backlit and very impressive. A nice zippy machine. But the downside for photos is the native display resolution is 1024 x 600, too small for most photo work. But nice and light and gives more flexibility and cheaper than an Epson P5000+ and much lower cost. Devices like the P5000 (which I have) only extract the embedded jpeg in the raw files, so you can't do critical focus checks.

Roger

[Axel Hildebrandt]

If using JPG thumbnails makes such a difference then it seems like a reasonable compromise. I used to have a laptop with similar specs and CS3, Bridge and ACR ran well, noticeably slower but it was not too bad. Extra memory made a difference on my computer, in case there is an empty bank left and the computer supports more memory.

[Charles Glatzer]

Roger,

Yes, Critical Focus is best checked at 100%.

Chas

[Ed Cordes]

I have recently been looking to upgrade to CS4 and learned that my 4 year old Dell XPS (Dual Core Pentium state of the art 4 years ago) will be slow and not run all the graphics available in CS4. I plan to upgrade the graphics card to one that can handle "direct 10 graphics" and have more memory on the graphics card (512 instead of 128) to allow better use of the RAM and faster processing. I am also going to reorganize the system to have software on one drive and all data on another to allow faster access by the software to its various commands and processes.

[Roger Clark]

Hi Ed,
I have another thread about CS4 being slow. On my relatively high end alienware computer, CS4 is really sluggish. Tools like paint brush really lag even on a small 1 megabyte file (on a 4 Gb machine).
Yet on my old sony laptop discussed above, CS4 is nice and zippy like cs3. Must be a driver problem.

If you google "Photoshop cs4 slow" (or sluggish) you will likely find many discussions.

Roger

[David Thomasson]

Often when I want to look quickly through a batch of raw files, I'll use IrfanView (http://www.irfanview.com/main_download_engl.htm). It's free. It'll also batch convert to jpeg if that's what you want.