Nikon Rumors is reporting that ON1 has added support for Nikon Z9 HE and HE* Raw files. I hope that means that the necessary developer codec information has been released and that Capture One and DxO (which I am more interested in than ON1) will follow suit. And perhaps that will allow Adobe to update its existing support for HE abnd HE* Raw files.
Nikon Z9 HE and HE* Raw Support
- Thread starter BillW
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
I believe Adobe already supports it?
Still no tethering. I think that's camera-specific, not file.
Yes, it does. I convert HE* files with ACR and edit in PS on an Apple Silicon MacBook Pro. I have seen some suggestion that Adobe is using emulation here and that it may work better with the new codec.
Pxlwz
Member
Tethertools has Smart Shooter 4 with a Lightroom plugin for the (among others) Nikon Z cameras. I did not try it yet, but you can try it for 30 days: https://tethertools.com/product/sma...-46824026&mc_cid=0832b7e6eb&mc_eid=d8fb19c7e6
I saw that, but there is a free and not bad workaround using Nikon Tether and having LRC automatically pull the file. It's a 3 second lag on my MBP and full resolution RAW.
JamesFarrell
Former Member
Sounds like the developer of the HE technology (which is based on the TicoRAW format from a company called IntoPix) has developed the SDK’s (Software Development Kits) to send to these various software companies. So I suspect we will see HE support for Capture One and others soon. That said, CP-1 will likely only provide support in their next major release (23) which means you’ll almost certainly have to pay to upgrade to be able to use HE NEFs. I would not otherwise pay to upgrade from CP 22 to 23 except that HE support and the smaller Z9 NEF files is important enough to me that I’ll likely bite the bullet and pay up for CP 23. Important in the sense that I would not feel the need to buy very large capacity memory cards which are exorbitantly expensive.
Late Edit: As I often find myself in situations where low light is such that my ISOs get a bit high, how HE* will affect shadow recovery issues in post processing is something that I'll have to experiment with once HE NEF support becomes part of Capture One. Again, I am no expert on all of this. I'll just have to learn by experimentation like many of us.
Last edited:
Chris K
Well-known member
I'm shooting exclusively in HE RAW now.
I did some low ISO tests for acuity and some high ISO tests for details lost from noise and for the posterization-like effects you can get from JPEG. I could definitely see differences between lossless and lossy in some places, but they were so minor that I had to be at 100%, and even then I could only see the differences when doing a true A/B. There's no way I could look at an arbitrary file and be able to tell which RAW compression method it uses.
My conclusion for the Z9 was that the quality difference was so small as to be irrelevant (and usually imperceptible), but in return I gained an infinite RAW buffer, an effectively-endless memory card, and a good amount of storage space long-term. It was an easy choice for my needs.
I did some low ISO tests for acuity and some high ISO tests for details lost from noise and for the posterization-like effects you can get from JPEG. I could definitely see differences between lossless and lossy in some places, but they were so minor that I had to be at 100%, and even then I could only see the differences when doing a true A/B. There's no way I could look at an arbitrary file and be able to tell which RAW compression method it uses.
My conclusion for the Z9 was that the quality difference was so small as to be irrelevant (and usually imperceptible), but in return I gained an infinite RAW buffer, an effectively-endless memory card, and a good amount of storage space long-term. It was an easy choice for my needs.
He RAW was the only file type I thought showed any difference and I also feel like its such a small difference I couldnt differentiate between files unless I was looking for it and knew which one was which. It was less of a degradation and more of a slight difference, not really better or worse.. I split the difference though a settled in on HE*
Chris K
Well-known member
I considered “playing it safe” and using HE* as well. In the end, I went with HE because my Z9 is one camera where I tend to rattle off a LOT of frames, and the pain of maybe seeing a JPEG-like artifact on a gigantic print is less to me than the pain of filling up my disks.
I applaud Nikon for offering such a wide spread of quality options, so we can all find a happy balance!
I applaud Nikon for offering such a wide spread of quality options, so we can all find a happy balance!
I absolutely see a difference when I work on shadows, so sticking with the highest res file.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
it's interesting after all this time i still haven't seen a credible image quality comparison
Chris K
Well-known member
You should try it… personally I found the difference minuscule, but all matters RAW and lossy seem to be a bit of a third rail, and if I’m honest I’m hesitant to stick my neck out with image samples cause the response to that kind of thing tends to escalate to complaints of a flawed test and demands for endless follow-ups to satisfy others’ test criteria.
Maybe I’m scarred from other, more pedantic/argumentative forums?
Maybe I’m scarred from other, more pedantic/argumentative forums?
They are all the same resolution.
Here are 2 different shoots 1 was pushing 5 stops and the other maxxing out the shadows and highlight sliders both at iso 1250, images cropped to 2000 pixels. Ill also link to the full size exports here.... https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1aTHYVpgfdl_VlfdAWoiMumGLD-L8GvvW?usp=sharing
Can anyone tell me which picture was shot with which file type?
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Chris K
Well-known member
I read that the HE RAW format applies JPEG-like lossy compression to the luminance channels in a RAW file. So each sensor channel that’s later demosaiced by the RAW converter has loss.
For example, the green channel in a blue sky might have numerically different--but photographically-insignificant--levels, so the algorithm mangles that data, and you don't care because it doesn't affect the photograph. The blue channel might have more significant data, and is less-compressed.
I also read this algorithm was the work of a third-party company... I think on this forum, when the Z9 was announced? In any case, the files are definitely the same resolution. Canon has its low-res "S-RAW", but this is different.
For example, the green channel in a blue sky might have numerically different--but photographically-insignificant--levels, so the algorithm mangles that data, and you don't care because it doesn't affect the photograph. The blue channel might have more significant data, and is less-compressed.
I also read this algorithm was the work of a third-party company... I think on this forum, when the Z9 was announced? In any case, the files are definitely the same resolution. Canon has its low-res "S-RAW", but this is different.
Chris K
Well-known member
There ain't much in it!
When I was comparing samples, I had to do it at 100% and toggle between photos to be able to detect differences. Later, I tried throwing both files into Photoshop and overlaying them with Subtract. I then saw the pixels that were actually different. It seemed flat areas where there is very little texture were the "most different". But even armed with the exact pixels that were different, I couldn't really see photographic differences. That's how I went from shooting 120MB lossless 16-bit RAWs to 60MB lossy 14-bit RAWs on my GFX100S, buying my 2TB laptop a few more years of service.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
yes, intoPIX's TicoRAW
Interesting test. I have been using HE* raw for most of my wildlife photos and have been happy with the results coming from ACR and PS, using Topaz DeNoise AI as needed. I should try this test.There ain't much in it!
When I was comparing samples, I had to do it at 100% and toggle between photos to be able to detect differences. Later, I tried throwing both files into Photoshop and overlaying them with Subtract. I then saw the pixels that were actually different. It seemed flat areas where there is very little texture were the "most different". But even armed with the exact pixels that were different, I couldn't really see photographic differences. That's how I went from shooting 120MB lossless 16-bit RAWs to 60MB lossy 14-bit RAWs on my GFX100S, buying my 2TB laptop a few more years of service.
@Steve has had nice things to say about HE* in his set-up book and his recent video on using the Z9 for wildlife. If I am reading his comments correctly, he has not seen a practical difference in the files for photo use yet. At the same time, he also expresses some nervousness about what he might be missing in some cases using HE* and whether there is any risk to continued support of HE* into the future. So it sounds like he is using lossless compressed unless he needs more room in the buffer or is short of card space.
Pro wildlife photographers like @Steve and pro portrait photographers like Matt Granger have reported that they see no useful difference between HE* and Lossless compressed raw.
I have no need for tethering so no experience with that.
I use Photo Mechanic 6 for initial culling, Light Room Classic (LRC) with Topaz plug ins and have my LRC presets Global set to Camera Settings. I primarily use Camera Standard with settings adjusted in it on my Z9.
I shoot a lot of birds for ID in a wide range of lighting conditions and ISO from 64 to 2500 and rarely up to 8 to 10,000.
So far I can not tell any difference between the lossless compressed and HE*.
Like @Steve I have still used lossless compressed most of the time until the last few weeks. I have switched for the last 3 shoots to HE* since I prefer the smaller file storage size.
And my hardware all works well with HE*
I use Delkin Black CFexpress b and process on an Apple M1Max Studio with 27" studio display and keep my images and LRC catalog on a OWC Envoy Pro SX w/thunderbolt OWCTB3ENVPSX04 4TB and back up with carbon copy cloner to 3 other external SSD drives.
I have no need for tethering so no experience with that.
I use Photo Mechanic 6 for initial culling, Light Room Classic (LRC) with Topaz plug ins and have my LRC presets Global set to Camera Settings. I primarily use Camera Standard with settings adjusted in it on my Z9.
I shoot a lot of birds for ID in a wide range of lighting conditions and ISO from 64 to 2500 and rarely up to 8 to 10,000.
So far I can not tell any difference between the lossless compressed and HE*.
Like @Steve I have still used lossless compressed most of the time until the last few weeks. I have switched for the last 3 shoots to HE* since I prefer the smaller file storage size.
And my hardware all works well with HE*
I use Delkin Black CFexpress b and process on an Apple M1Max Studio with 27" studio display and keep my images and LRC catalog on a OWC Envoy Pro SX w/thunderbolt OWCTB3ENVPSX04 4TB and back up with carbon copy cloner to 3 other external SSD drives.
Bernard45
Member
A good overview of HE support by Raw converters and raw viewers. One error though, Fastrawviewer reads embedded previews.
www.nikoncafe.com
Nikon Z9 Raw Photo / NRAW Video Support | 07 July 2023
UPDATED: 07 July 2023 07 July 2023: Topaz Photo AI 1.4.0 now supports for HE* and HE compressed raw files via the intoPIX SDK. High Efficiency Raw Nikon's own lossless compressed raw file delivers a full resolution image at an average file size of 55 to 60 MB. The Nikon Z9 offers a new High...
www.nikoncafe.com
Jack McEwan
Well-known member
The SDK for TicoRAW support from intoPIX has been available for the last 1-2 months. See …https://www.intopix.com/fasttico-raw-cpu-gpu-sdks. When Capture One will support this format is anybody’s guess, but most likely in 2023 after the release of Capture One 23. It’s my understanding that Adobe doesn’t presently have ARM based architecture for Nikon HE* files and that there’s room for improvement in their approach. It’s probably premature to assess the capabilities of HE* files based upon the present implementation in Photoshop/ACR, as Adobe’s implementation predated the release of the intoPIX SDK. Hopefully, Capture One will have HE* support implemented in the not too distant future.
*************** Update 10-17-22 Capture One 22 (15-4.1.9) now has HE* support! *************
Out today is the latest version of Capture One 22 with HE* support.
*************** Update 10-17-22 Capture One 22 (15-4.1.9) now has HE* support! *************
Out today is the latest version of Capture One 22 with HE* support.
Last edited:
Looks like Capture One has now added Z9 high efficiency support. Will have to update my version and try it.
JamesFarrell
Former Member
Just updated to Capture One 15.4.1 and shot and imported a couple dozen Z9 HE* files. HE* files handle normally; everything looks fine. No issues that I can see. NEF Files sizes dropped from Lossless Compressed at an average of 55mb each to an average of the mid 30's mb for HE*. The test shots were all at ISO 64 no exposure compensation. Now my aging eyes are not that in tune to looking for minor differences in the images, e.g., dynamic range or whatever. So, no comment about any differences. I'll try some shots later at higher ISOs closer to sunset. That might be more telling. Images were recorded on a Delkin XQD card.
Really pleased (and somewhat surprised) that Capture One included this update in CP-1 ver. 22 instead of making me pay for an upgrade later this fall to CP-1 Ver. 23 to use HE* or HE. Side Note: My system is a MacBook Pro M1 running Monterey 12.6. I cannot see the Z9 thumbnails (lossless compressed or HE) in Finder. MAC OS does not support the Z9 NEFs yet. But they are, of course, visible in Capture One in the file browser.
EDIT: When I look at the metadata for the HE* files in Capture One, there is no indication that the file is HE* or HE versus Lossless Compressed. The only way one can tell is by looking at the file size in Finder. The same is true in Nikon NX Studio - only hint that the file is HE* or HE is the file size.
Really pleased (and somewhat surprised) that Capture One included this update in CP-1 ver. 22 instead of making me pay for an upgrade later this fall to CP-1 Ver. 23 to use HE* or HE. Side Note: My system is a MacBook Pro M1 running Monterey 12.6. I cannot see the Z9 thumbnails (lossless compressed or HE) in Finder. MAC OS does not support the Z9 NEFs yet. But they are, of course, visible in Capture One in the file browser.
EDIT: When I look at the metadata for the HE* files in Capture One, there is no indication that the file is HE* or HE versus Lossless Compressed. The only way one can tell is by looking at the file size in Finder. The same is true in Nikon NX Studio - only hint that the file is HE* or HE is the file size.
Last edited: