Just talking this over with my friend Helen and she notices that, printing images processed with FilmPack’s emulations, at larger sizes, you tend to see the beautifully crafted grain that DxO have created. All of which helps.
Yes, there is in most raw formats. And as long as this compression is mostly lossless, it’s no problem. Some of the newer compressed raw formats use lossy compression which leaves no way back to the original raw data (image data)…and I suppose that this is why DxO doesn’t want to work with these files.
TIFF files have, as long as they aren’t compressed, the same file size for a given camera model. In comparison, RAW files are bigger or smaller depending on image content, a result from compression. RAW files with images that are detailed and/or noisy tend to be larger than e.g. files with a completely blown image…no matter if one wants to call the load of numbers an image or not 
That’s absolutely correct, George. Some adjustment types require access to the original sensor data, aka raw file data.
In digital photography, the “sidecar” file associated with a RAW image file typically contains metadata and adjustments made to the image, including exposure adjustments, white balance, and other non-destructive edits. The sidecar file is often in XML format (commonly using the .xmp extension) and is separate from the original raw image file.
The sidecar file records the changes you’ve made to the image in your editing software without altering the original RAW data. When you open the RAW file in the same or compatible software, these adjustments are applied according to the information stored in the sidecar file. This allows for flexibility, as you can adjust or revert changes without losing any original image data. You can start all over again by simply trashing the sidecar file, as the original raw data remains unaltered.
Even Prime Denoise does not alter the data in the raw file, but it does -require- it do work its magic.
The original raw file is never overwritten. This is easy to prove: load a raw file, make some vast and obvious visual changes, such as quadrupling the exposure and halving the white white balance. Quit your software. Go find the raw file, and you’ll see a new file, with its name, but the .XML or xmp extension.
Delete that xmp file. Then go load up the raw file again. You’ll see that all the changes are missing, because they only exist as settings values in the XML file. The original raw file remains unchanged.
I think you’ve got it basically correct, George, except that there is no “Save” which will overwrite the original raw file.
Thanks for your interest, Mike.
You can see my images at https://valleau.art and my printing services at https://itstheprint.com.
Tracy
The side car files that contain the editings are program dependent. Every program has their own rules. I don’t think xmp is used for editings. In PL that are the dop files.
The xmp and iptc sections specs make it possible to add these files to the raw or let them go beside the raw. No problem at all.
You make the same fault as you blame others: you don’t distinguish between the raw data, the sensor data, and the raw file,the disk file. I and many others here add their keywords and other metadata in a xmp or iptcc sections direct to the file.
For raw files there is no Save and no Save As just for the simple reason there’s no raw file in memory. In memory there’s only a RGB raster image. That can be exported.
George
1 Like
I went to the link, and spent the most time scrolling through all your images in the “Museum” collections. Most I thought I at least understood, but others left me lost. Very enjoyable to look through them.
My own semi-permanent collection can be found at:
I’m preparing now for my next trip to India - I do volunteer work at Aravind Eye Hospital, where poor people get their cataract surgery and other problems taken care of at no cost.
Your link took me to a fascinating place - I will go back this evening, and check out the other places you link to.
Thanks for the kind words, and your time. You are correct: fine art photography can indeed be mysterious. I’ve been doing it for decades, and there’s always something new to learn!
I too enjoyed your photos. … and bravo for your work in India!
This probably isn’t the proper place to ask, but why not…
Have you used PhotoLab, and/or DarkTable?
I guess everyone uses various software for whatever reasons they feel are important. For ages I felt Adobe was the way to go, with PhotoShop and Lightroom, but this was when I had a periodic expense to buy the latest CD or DVD. Then they went subscription, and while I’m still paying the monthly charge, I moved completely to PhotoLab.
For better or worse, PhotoLab won’t open all my raw files, so I also got involved in DarkTable - the open source route.
I’m comfortable with what I’ve got now, and with what I’m doing now. But I’m curious as to what you think about these two programs. Joanna’s enthusiasm is contagious, and while I’m no Joanna, I can still try. PhotoLab now feels as comfortable as an “old shoe” that fits me perfectly, or maybe vice versa. I’ve still got loads of other programs I’ve purchased, but I mostly ignore them.
I’d hate to try to list all the various software I’ve used over the past 2 decades. Many dozens of different apps. Here’s a list of a few, taken by simple copy pasting from a menubar file menu, and as such includes a few apps which are not strictly for editing. Just too lazy to cull it.
AccuRaw EXR
AccuRaw Monochrome
Adobe Bridge 2024
Affinity Photo 2
ApolloOne
ColorThink Pro 3.0.9
DxO FilmPack 7
DxO PhotoLab 7
DxO ViewPoint 4
Excire Foto
FastRawViewer
Filter Forge
FotoMagico
jAlbum
Optics
Optimage
Photo Mechanic 6
Photo Supreme
Photo Transfer App
PhotoConvert 5
Photomatix Pro 7
PhotoSweeper X
PhotoZoom Pro 9
QuadToneProfiler-K3
QuadToneProfiler-Pro
Raw Right Away
RawDigger
RawTherapee
SilverFast 9
spectrumviz.jar
Squash
Topaz Gigapixel AI
Topaz Photo AI
VueScan
WALTR HEIC Converter
WebP Converter
Then in the past, there was On1, Exposure and dozens I’ve long since forgotten. If there was a Mac app for it, the odds are excellent I used it, or at least tried.
Because I had to teach it in graduate school, Photoshop and LR are the ones I know best, and “the devil you know…” That said PhotoLab (I’ve all versions of all DxO’s software over the years) is a close second, and I use it frequently, mostly for color correction and denoising. I’ve had a use for FilmPack and ViewPoint as well, and I find them to excellent for what they do.
Never used Apple Aperture? What a shame 
You were at the source in the company which killed it, no? Shame beyond believe 
1 Like
No attempts with the open source Dark Table, or GIMP ?
I have them both, but have only glanced at them. I do not use either for work.
Yes, I used Aperture, years back, until I switched to PS/LR. (As I said, there is little I have not seen and tried in the the way of Mac software. I simply cannot remember all the names.)
You don’t feel to react on my post?
George
Sorry for not replying sooner, but I have a life outside of this forum.
Your first paragraph is correct.
You make the same fault as you blame others: you don’t distinguish between the raw data, the sensor data, and the raw file,the disk file.
Hah. Must be a language thing then, because that is -exactly- why I replied in the first place. The raw data IS the sensor data, saved to disk in a raw file.
Please see my blog, and then write back explaining what I got wrong about the file types and data.
https://www.itstheprint.com/blog/2024/08/24/about-camera-raw-files/
1 Like
I’ve no problems with your article. That looks good.
Except that I can edit a raw file. I can add iptc and/orxmp sections to it and edit them. The raw data stays unchanged. That’s what I meant.
The xmp files are created to maintain metadata and is short for Extensible Metadata Platform. I don’t know about programs that store their editing list in that file, though it’s not impossible. But deleting as in your test mifgt also do vanish other metadata like keywords, copyright,gps etc.
George
As for sidecars, the situation with PhotoLab and e.g. Lightroom Classic is, that PhotoLab writes most things (edits and metadata) into the .dop sidecars and metadata to .xmp files (this has been discussed in the forum a while ago) and Lightroom writes edits and metadata into .xmp sidecars only. Metadata can be exchanged (to various degrees) through .xmp sidecars with many apps, while both PL and Lr are blind to each other’s edits.
Both PL and Lr leave proprietary raw files alone. They can write metadata to .dng files though. Writing to proprietary raw files requires software other than PL and Lr. Which is the one you use, @George ? ExifTools?
The old Nikon ViewNx2. I can’t edit the file, my camera’s are not supported, but I can rename them and adding keywords etc…
George
…strange, your cameras are not supported by ViewNx2, but it can still write keywords. Probably done with ExifTools built into the app, unlike PL which does not seem to use ExifTools.