Anyone still using "lossless compression" image quality with Z9?

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).

Member's gallery
ButlerKid said:
How much smaller are HE* files than raw Z8 files? I guess you have less "crop-ability" with the small sizes? Any other pro's or con's to using HE*?
Click to expand...
Half the size or so. I haven't found a drawback for wildlife at all. You can push them just as much as normal raws. There's not any real difference.

The only reason I don't use it for astro is because the tools I use are third party and don't support the HE raws.
 
Member's gallery
ButlerKid said:
How much smaller are HE* files than raw Z8 files? I guess you have less "crop-ability" with the small sizes? Any other pro's or con's to using HE*?
Click to expand...
Just looked at some files from a trip to the Great Bear Rain Forest (where I shot HE* on a Z9 and Z8) and a trip to Paris (where I shot lossless compressed raw on Z8s). I checked a sample, not all.

File size varies with the scene, as less detailed portions of an image (say water or sky) will often compress more readily. My HE* files from the Great Bear Rain Forest generally ranged in size from 30 to 35 mb. My lossless compressed files from Paris generally ranged from 55 to 60 mb. These are FX; DX crop would be much smaller in both cases.

I don’t feel limited in cropping HE* files, something I’d probably do more with wildlife shots than with landscape shots, but have not explicitly tested it.

I believe that Thom Hogan has written that you might have a bit more noise in the shadows of HE* files. I can’t say I’ve seen that, but I also do not have as practiced an eye as he does and many in this forum do. But I have used lossless compressed on landscape shots in case this might matter, as I shoot far fewer frames in landscape outings.

It’s interesting to me that both Steve and Brad Hill like HE* raw at this point. I respect their opinions. Thom Hogan, whose opinions I also respect and who I have traveled with, is a counter example and uses lossless compressed, as far as I can tell, as a general matter, including for wildlife work.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Steve said:
For me, I played with it a little here and there and never saw a difference. So, I went all-in last year in the Serengeti and shot the entire thing in HE* - no issues. I did the same the rest of the year with the Z8/9 and have been happy with the results.
Click to expand...

There are probably lots of photographers on this site that will start shooting HE* today!
 
Member's gallery
I would take any form of RAW precapture from Nikon .. even HE Raw would be more than fine. The interesting fact is this: jpeg files are generally larger than HE Raw files! So Nikon has no excuse not to add the HE Raw precapture option (unless they don't want to!) . It's certainly not a buffer or processing issue if HE raw file sizes are smaller than Jpeg files. Clearly it was a bad decision on Nikon's behalf to introduce a useful feature but cripple it with jpeg limitations. I wonder if Nikon got the memo because their user base has been asking for this for quite some time now

BillW said:
Pre-capture uses jpegs only, not raw. So unfortunately, HE* is not available for pre-capture now. I have been hoping Nikon might add HE* raw for pre-capture for the Z9 and Z8 in a firmware update, but it hasn’t done so yet.
Click to expand...
 
Member's gallery
maxxus46 said:
I would take any form of RAW precapture from Nikon .. even HE Raw would be more than fine. The interesting fact is this: jpeg files are generally larger than HE Raw files! So Nikon has no excuse not to add the HE Raw precapture option (unless they don't want to!) . It's certainly not a buffer or processing issue if HE raw file sizes are smaller than Jpeg files. Clearly it was a bad decision on Nikon's behalf to introduce a useful feature but cripple it with jpeg limitations. I wonder if Nikon got the memo because their user base has been asking for this for quite some time now
Click to expand...
The processing overhead to compress HE is likely greater than JPEG.

Or Nikon just likes to torture us like no discount on the 180-600 this season. LOL
 
Member's gallery
There would be LESS processing overhead. The camera always shoots images in a RAW , unconverted format internaly, meaning the camera is processing the raw image internally into its final Jpeg form based on exposure, white balance etc. So I would say there is less processing overhead.


Mal Paso said:
The processing overhead to compress HE is likely greater than JPEG.

Or Nikon just likes to torture us like no discount on the 180-600 this season. LOL
Click to expand...
 
Member's gallery
It took a while for the software I use for editing to support HE* when I got the Z9 but for the Z8 it was available at the same time as RAW. I’ve been shooting in HE* since the software supported it and have never gone back. I even use it on the Zf. If it is supported by your software I don’t see a reason not to use it.
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
I was resistant to switching to HE* but once I did, I never went back. I can abuse the RAW files in Lightroom to the extent that I’m worried about running afoul of the Geneva Convention, yet they seem as pliable as lossless compressed files.
Click to expand...
Ugh, I just discovered HE* isn’t supported by Photo Mechanic. If that’s correct, what are good options for ingesting and culling and organizing?
 
Member's gallery
Yes because of the lack of support by MacOs. Sometimes I need to pick an image out of a folder and I don't want to open another program. I have plenty of external space with a NVME and NAS so I don't care about the size.
 
Member's gallery
cchuck said:
Ugh, I just discovered HE* isn’t supported by Photo Mechanic. If that’s correct, what are good options for ingesting and culling and organizing?
Click to expand...
@BillW in Post #23 indicated Photo Mechanic could use the embedded jpgs. Hopefully he can clarify.....

I use Bridge a lot for culling, keywording, etc. The smaller file size should result in Bridge being able to handle the files faster.......I hope!
 
Member's gallery
maxxus46 said:
The reason HE is available with jpeg combination is due to your Raw conversion software. It's able to read the jpeg file, but cannot read HE Raw files. What are you using for post processing your RAW files ? For example ; Programs like DxO PhotoLab can process HE Raw files...
Click to expand...
I have not had any problems processing HE* from my Z9's for a long time in Light Room Classic (LRC) and Nikon NX Studio (it was called by a different name back then and LRC actually worked a short time before Nikons own software LOL.

My earlier comnent re the jpg + HEIF (not HE) combos is only related to the Z6III. I adjusted my earlier comment to hopefully clarify a bit more.
 
Member's gallery
Thanks to @Steve I am using HE* science I've watched his video long ago when he didn't see any difference in some comparison shots (losless vs HE*).
I mostly do sports photography with many burst shots and HE* mean a lot to me.
More photos, more storage on card and laptop, and faster transfer from card to laptop (photo journalist work).
I use ACDSee as a viewer (my whole life I am addicted to ACDSee for watching and selecting photos) and Capture One Pro for editing.
If You ask me of course.
Somebody asked me?...... No?
Ok, I will post anyway 😊🥂
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
For me, I played with it a little here and there and never saw a difference. So, I went all-in last year in the Serengeti and shot the entire thing in HE* - no issues. I did the same the rest of the year with the Z8/9 and have been happy with the results.
Click to expand...
@Steve How are you culling now? One of the reasons I keep using NEF lossless compressed and not HE* is culling hundreds to thousands of photos I use Photo Mechanic 6. LRC and NX Studio very slow compared to Photo Mechanic.
 
Member's gallery
ButlerKid said:
@BillW in Post #23 indicated Photo Mechanic could use the embedded jpgs. Hopefully he can clarify.....

I use Bridge a lot for culling, keywording, etc. The smaller file size should result in Bridge being able to handle the files faster.......I hope!
Click to expand...
I can see my HE* raw files with my copy of Photo Mechanic. I use it to download photos from memory cards; change file names; view photos as a browser, including rating and deleting; launch photos from Photo Mechanic to Photoshop, ..... I have always assumed that Photo Mechanic was reading the jpeg to give me an image. I have Photo Mechanic 6.0. Build 7212. I have a purchased copy of Photo Mechanic and do not have a subscription going forward. I felt the subscription terms were not a good value.

If you have Adobe, you can also use Bridge as a browser. I also have Fast Raw Viewer, version 2.09 (build 2038) and it supports HE*/HE and is not a beta. I thought was still in beta, but I see my copy is a regular release now.

[Corrected typo]
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
BillW said:
I can see my HE* raw files with my copy of Photo Mechanic. I use it to download photos from memory cards; change file names; view photos as a browser, including rating and deleting; launch photos from Photo Mechanic to Photoshhop, ..... I have always assumed that Photo Mechanic was reading the jpeg to give me an image. I have Photo Mechanic 6.0. Build 7212. I have a purchased copy of Photo Mechanic and do not have a subscription going forward. I felt the subscription terms were not a good value.

If you have Adobe, you can also use Bridge as a browser. I also have Fast Raw Viewer, version 2.09 (build 2038) and it supports HE*/HE and is not a beta. I thought was still in beta, but I see my copy is a regular release now.
Click to expand...
Great news!
 
Member's gallery
maxxus46 said:
I would take any form of RAW precapture from Nikon .. even HE Raw would be more than fine. The interesting fact is this: jpeg files are generally larger than HE Raw files! So Nikon has no excuse not to add the HE Raw precapture option (unless they don't want to!) . It's certainly not a buffer or processing issue if HE raw file sizes are smaller than Jpeg files. Clearly it was a bad decision on Nikon's behalf to introduce a useful feature but cripple it with jpeg limitations. I wonder if Nikon got the memo because their user base has been asking for this for quite some time now
Click to expand...


maxxus46 said:
There would be LESS processing overhead. The camera always shoots images in a RAW , unconverted format internaly, meaning the camera is processing the raw image internally into its final Jpeg form based on exposure, white balance etc. So I would say there is less processing overhead.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure. Both are done in hardware in the still image stream pipeline, and let the live view stream pipeline take care of the EVF or the back display.

Producing HE* in the pre-release capture wouldn't require the post-processing, but the HE* compression algorithm (or HE - it's just a parameter) is a little more demanding than JPEG. Since the post-processing is rather trivial, it's not clear which one would consume more power.

Either way, it shouldn't be an overhead for the EXPEED 7, so I'm not sure why it's not an option. Actually, my understanding was that only the burst modes (30-120 fps) were limited to JPEG in pre-release capture, not other framerates.
 
Member's gallery
JAJohnson said:
I’ve been doing so since it was first released. My only complaint is that thumbnails for HE* images on MacOS aren’t yet available.
Click to expand...
Yes, I have as well. The buffer performance is so much better using HE*. I did have to wait a bit with my Z50ii until LrC support HE* for the Z50ii. I just think that it will become more the standard when respected shooters like Steve acknowledge that they are using it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top