Canon CR3 format

[Journeyman]

Good day,

I have taken delivery of a Canon EOS 9 D, a great little camera that suits me well.
The RAW files generated a bit of excitement though.

This camera uses Canon’s new RAW format CR3, it is unlossy. The format itself seems very good with plenty of data available. The format does not run on any of my processing programs other than updated Canon Digital processing. My coal fired laptop is not suitable for Lightroom. I am not in a position to replace my laptop at the moment.

The images can be converted to another file, TIFF, JPG etc. The TIFF files are huge. Some 94 - 139 mb. Is there a way to reduce the size of the TIFF images?

I use Luminar and Corel Paintshop software, neither will open CR3 files. Maybe use JPG only until the laptop is replaced.

Has anyone dealt with this and how did it work for you?
Thanks and regards, Journeyman

[nardes]

One method would be to use Canon's DPP to perform edits like lens corrections and maybe some of the other functions in there, then crop the image to the size you want and then if that does result in an acceptably smaller file size, export it as a TIF for further editing in Corel.

Uncompressed TIFs "contain" more data, so will give you more headroom to process the file in Corel, whereas JPGs have all the stuff baked into an 8 bit file, so any extended processing in Corel may not give the best results.

Cheers

Dennis

[ameerat42]

I just know you mean the Canon EOS 90D (don't you?)

What Nardes said about doing the conversion is right - [unless you've got something else that'll do it] use DPP
(Light, I think) that comes with the camera. I know nothing about the other two image editing programs you
mentioned, but they should be fairly capable of working on tiffs and jpegs. There are a few other freebies that
can get you by...

Don't be surprised that TIFFs can be that large. It is quite normal - which leads to talking about IQ loss and compression.
This camera has a C-raw recording mode that I can't see the use of since it is stated that it can attenuate shadow detail.
So, use the NORMAL raw file recording. (You didn't mention what their typical size is.)

And the point is, you can use two different tiff compressions, called LZW and ZIP, resp. Both are lossless. They are good for
file sizes on disk, where space can be a problem. Read here about 'em.

Two free image processors I use are Faststone Image Viewer (FIV) (and editor in fact), and an old version of Adobe Photoshop,
version CS2, available here.

Another one to mention is GIMP (q.v. - and not "The GIMP", unless it becomes your pet.) I don't use it for my own reasons,
mainly because I think its operation is unnecessarily arcane, but many others swear by it, rather than at it as I do
One obvious advantage is that it is rather up-to-date in features, but my contention is that these are of limited value if you
do not understand the basics of image processing.

FIV is mainly for browsing through the images (much like DPP lets you do) where you're looking at the embedded jpegs of the
CR3 files.

CS2 is for working on TIFFs and jpegs saved from the raw files, although FIV can also do a fair bit of what CS2 does.

When you know one image processing program you learn a lot of ideas that you can transfer across to other such programs.

Finally, to stress an important point made by Nardes: do as much processing as you can on the raw file before you save it
as a TIFF or jpeg, and the corollary: leave your raw files as they are (although changes to them are usually non-destructive).

That's enough for now... Ask if you want any clarification.

[Journeyman]

Good day,
It is a 90D. Good thing I don’t proof read for a living.

I believe the way forward is:
Camera (35Mb) to DPP - convert to TIF (94Mb) - editing program. Probably not a whole lot more work. I understand the big file will offer more detail.

It will change things slightly, it caught me by surprise. No mention of the format in publicity. The reason for the change is probably valid as technology moves forward. The size of the files is interesting when I remember than my first computer was an Apple 2E (1981) with 48k of RAM now a photo is up to 140Mb. Almost 2,950 2Es.

Canon’s system offers TIF or JPG. I will see how it all goes and compare the results.
Thanks and regards, Journeyman (Dennis)

[ameerat42]

If 35MB is the size of your raw files, then that's fairly typical for that MPx output.
Just remember not to hobble the file recording info by using the compressed raw
option, or all your subsequent care in maintaining and manipulating the data as tiffs
will be of less avail. Ie, if info is not there to begin with, the tiff container will be
holding empty space. We've moved a fair way past the tiny b/w 2-bit bitmaps that
graced the screens of the 1980s (a bit of licence there )

[arthurking83]

What I would do:

Use DPP to 'edit' the basics. eg. recover any lost 'data' like dark shadows, and or highlights .. maybe a touch of colour and whatnot.
I have a copy of DPP(for testing/helping), and found it worked quite well.

So once the basics are done, convert to JPG full size(no resizing) and then any additional editing made via Photoshop is then easy.
TIFFs are an almost redundant format now, considering the alternative workflow of RAW(edited) to jpg with more editing.

RAW files can be pushed harder than TIFF files if required, so TIFFs large size is not an advantage compared to raw files in any way.
Their only advantage is that you can 'acquire' them for better quality .. ie. from a scanner and whatever other means.

But once you have a decently dynamic jpg created from a raw file .. jpg editing is very good.

Only possible reason I could imagine needing a TIFF file is if you ever wanted a super high quality print of an image at very large print sizes. Other than this specific use, jpg is fine.

So, DPP(raw) edited to a good result in terms of colour and tone .. then any further processing is fine as jpg from here on.
Also, a tip so you don't fill your laptop up(or any external storage too quickly) .. resize the final jpg files if you want to keep them. No need to keep them, but be sure to keep raw files.
You can always make offshoot files from raw files, but never the other way around again. And there may be a possibility that at some point in the future you may revisit old files and re edit them again.

One important question too .. Paintshop does allow some raw file support, but it depends on which version of paintshop you actually have. Is it an older(maybe free) version or something?
Paintshop Pro has raw file support.
I used to use Painthshop back when it was JASC(before Corel).
Lastly what laptop type/model/operating system?