Thirsty Moth

On 2015-07-23 02:35:01 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:28:33 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2015-07-22 15:39:59 +0000, PeterN said:
On 7/22/2015 10:15 AM, nospam wrote:

posting obviously must be jpg but for printing, they're directly
printed from raw.

Which printers print directly from RAW?

I print adjusted NEFs, RAFs, CR2s, PSD, and TIFF from Lightroom to my
R2880. I don't have any JPEGs in Lightroom.

With both of my Epson printers I can print RAW directly from the camera
(USB) or memory card.

Are you using the Epson RAW Plugin?

I have never heard of an Epson RAW plugin.

I don't even have to install Epson drivers as the Epson printers are
supported by OSX basically making the Epson (...and Canon, HP, etc.)
plug 'n' play on Macs. The OS recognises the printer and downloads
whatever it needs (in my case the Epson printer utility) and goes to
work.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2015-07-23 02:35:01 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:28:33 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2015-07-22 15:39:59 +0000, PeterN said:
On 7/22/2015 10:15 AM, nospam wrote:

posting obviously must be jpg but for printing, they're directly
printed from raw.

Which printers print directly from RAW?

I print adjusted NEFs, RAFs, CR2s, PSD, and TIFF from Lightroom to my
R2880. I don't have any JPEGs in Lightroom.

With both of my Epson printers I can print RAW directly from the camera
(USB) or memory card.

Are you using the Epson RAW Plugin?

BTW: Now your clock seems to be running a few hours fast.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2015-07-22 23:04:49 +0000, nospam said:

In article 2015072215574520614-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

Like me, PeterN is trying to find out how it is possible for a printer
to swallow a raw file and spit out an image. My understanding is that
this is not possible. You seem to be supporting that view by extending
the argument to 'conversion'.

Go to Lightroom and select any NEF or DNG you have available. If you
want to make whatever adjustments and edits you choose to (including
aspect ratio crops) in the Develop Module, or not.

Next go to the print module and you will find that you should have
little trouble printing that NEF, or DNG, all without an intermediate
JPEG phase. As I said I don't have any JPEGs in Lightroom.

As to what Lightroom does as an intermediate phase I have no idea, as
it doesn't leave any evidence of sneakily creating a JPEG without my
knowledge.

it doesn't need to create anything. all it does is render the image
based on any edits you've made and sends it to the display or printer.

Your sarcasm meter seems to be out of wack with regard to my final
remark inmy response to Eric. In fact there was no need for you to try
and educate me on the subject at all.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

| Why BMP?
|

It's a simple map of pixels with no lossiness, so
if I'm through with RAW adjustments, or if I want
to work on a JPG, BMP is a way to store the data.
(On Windows.)

| All my shooting is RAW, and occasionalty RAW+JPEG. Since my workflow is
| Lightroom+ Photoshop I have no need to print from JPEG, and so I don't
| have to concern myself with compression artifacts in the prints. For
| posting online I export to JPEG from Lightroom.
|

That makes sense. I just didn't realize RAW stored
EXIF. Since it's generally in JPGs I mistakenly thought
it was a JPG-only feature.

On 2015-07-22 23:37:21 +0000, "Mayayana" said:

| Why BMP?
|

It's a simple map of pixels with no lossiness, so
if I'm through with RAW adjustments, or if I want
to work on a JPG, BMP is a way to store the data.
(On Windows.)

You are going to have a better adjusted archive image file if you save
as a TIF or PSD.
That said I don't recall what post processing software you are using,
and your method might be more than adequate for your needs. I never use
BMP and see little purpose of even going down that road.

| All my shooting is RAW, and occasionalty RAW+JPEG. Since my workflow is
| Lightroom+ Photoshop I have no need to print from JPEG, and so I don't
| have to concern myself with compression artifacts in the prints. For
| posting online I export to JPEG from Lightroom.
|

That makes sense. I just didn't realize RAW stored
EXIF. Since it's generally in JPGs I mistakenly thought
it was a JPG-only feature.

Nope it's a RAW feature which rubs off on JPEGs whenever they play with
the big boys.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2015-07-23 03:36:37 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 15:57:45 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2015-07-23 02:17:44 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:09:15 -0400, nospam
wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

posting obviously must be jpg but for printing, they're directly
printed from raw.

Which printers print directly from RAW?

all of them.

Proof?

open raw image. choose print from the menus. collect print from printer.

optionally adjust image prior to printing.

Are you saying there is no conversion prior to printing.

obviously the printer driver converts the data to whatever format the
printer needs, but that isn't anything that the user sees nor needs to
be concerned about.

whatever software you're using also converts the data to its own native
format. your camera isn't spitting out .psd files.

the user simply opens a raw image, adjusts to taste and prints. done.

they do the same thing with a text file, spreadsheet, 3d graphic or
whatever else. just open the document, adjust if desired, choose print
and collect print.

the point is there is *no* need to save as a jpeg or any other interim
format to print.

So there is a conversion. Once there is a need for conversion, it is
immaterial whether the user does the conversion, or an activated app
does the conversion.

nope.

once again, you're trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

the raw image is converted to pixels on the display and nobody
considers that a conversion. the magnetic fields on the hard drive are
converted to electrical pulses and nobody considers that a conversion.

there's a conversion with *everything* on a computer.

the printer is just another display device that uses paper instead of a
liquid crystal (or crt). apps draw to either or both and may not even
know the difference.

again, the user opens a raw image ...

Opens a raw image in what?

Whatever software you are using. In our case that should be Lightroom.

... (or whatever format, it doesn't even
need to be an image) and picks print and the computer does the rest.

that is not a conversion.

Of course it is.

Your statement is contrary to other comments I have heard.

then you're listening to ignorant people.

Leave out snarky comments.

i'll say whatever i want.

Your attitude adds to your persona. You have a sick and desperate need
for attention. Looks like you have to keep convincing yourself of your
greatness. Too bad others are not so convinced.

the fact that you're resorting to insults shows that you have nothing
whatsoever to refute what i'm saying.

as i said, you're trying to argue for the sake of arguing, and it's
failing.

I don't think you are right about this.

Like me, PeterN is trying to find out how it is possible for a printer
to swallow a raw file and spit out an image. My understanding is that
this is not possible. You seem to be supporting that view by extending
the argument to 'conversion'.

Go to Lightroom and select any NEF or DNG you have available. If you
want to make whatever adjustments and edits you choose to (including
aspect ratio crops) in the Develop Module, or not.

But - but - but .... That is not printing directly from a raw image.
There is the small matter of a huge wad of LR in the way.

OK!
Then connect your camera to your trusty R3880, or use a card reader via
USB and select an NEF to print.
No computer, no Lightroom, no Photoshop.

People are at cross purposes. I've just posted another article on that
subject.

You are too concerned with the mystery of the process.

Next go to the print module and you will find that you should have
little trouble printing that NEF, or DNG, all without an intermediate
JPEG phase. As I said I don't have any JPEGs in Lightroom.

As to what Lightroom does as an intermediate phase I have no idea, as
it doesn't leave any evidence of sneakily creating a JPEG without my
knowledge.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2015-07-23 03:41:49 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 16:09:17 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

BTW: Now your clock seems to be running a few hours fast.

Yes. I swapped over the system drive on my computer (disk image and
all that) and I am waiting out of curiousity to discover when the
clock pulls itself into sync with a master time station (or whatever
they call them). You may have to put with the wrong time from me for a
few more days.

Why not just sync it yourself?

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 11:52:31 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , PeterN
wrote:

posting obviously must be jpg but for printing, they're directly
printed from raw.

Which printers print directly from RAW?

all of them.

Proof?

open raw image. choose print from the menus. collect print from printer.


Open raw image in what?


optionally adjust image prior to printing.

Your statement is contrary to other comments I have heard.

then you're listening to ignorant people.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:09:15 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , PeterN
wrote:

posting obviously must be jpg but for printing, they're directly
printed from raw.

Which printers print directly from RAW?

all of them.

Proof?

open raw image. choose print from the menus. collect print from printer.

optionally adjust image prior to printing.

Are you saying there is no conversion prior to printing.

obviously the printer driver converts the data to whatever format the
printer needs, but that isn't anything that the user sees nor needs to
be concerned about.

whatever software you're using also converts the data to its own native
format. your camera isn't spitting out .psd files.

the user simply opens a raw image, adjusts to taste and prints. done.

they do the same thing with a text file, spreadsheet, 3d graphic or
whatever else. just open the document, adjust if desired, choose print
and collect print.

the point is there is *no* need to save as a jpeg or any other interim
format to print.

So there is a conversion. Once there is a need for conversion, it is
immaterial whether the user does the conversion, or an activated app
does the conversion.

nope.

once again, you're trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

the raw image is converted to pixels on the display and nobody
considers that a conversion. the magnetic fields on the hard drive are
converted to electrical pulses and nobody considers that a conversion.

there's a conversion with *everything* on a computer.

the printer is just another display device that uses paper instead of a
liquid crystal (or crt). apps draw to either or both and may not even
know the difference.

again, the user opens a raw image ...

Opens a raw image in what?

... (or whatever format, it doesn't even
need to be an image) and picks print and the computer does the rest.

that is not a conversion.

Of course it is.

Your statement is contrary to other comments I have heard.

then you're listening to ignorant people.

Leave out snarky comments.

i'll say whatever i want.

Your attitude adds to your persona. You have a sick and desperate need
for attention. Looks like you have to keep convincing yourself of your
greatness. Too bad others are not so convinced.

the fact that you're resorting to insults shows that you have nothing
whatsoever to refute what i'm saying.

as i said, you're trying to argue for the sake of arguing, and it's
failing.

I don't think you are right about this.

Like me, PeterN is trying to find out how it is possible for a printer
to swallow a raw file and spit out an image. My understanding is that
this is not possible. You seem to be supporting that view by extending
the argument to 'conversion'.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2015-07-23 05:21:08 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 17:00:09 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2015-07-23 03:36:37 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 15:57:45 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2015-07-23 02:17:44 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:09:15 -0400, nospam
wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

posting obviously must be jpg but for printing, they're directly
printed from raw.

Which printers print directly from RAW?

all of them.

Proof?

open raw image. choose print from the menus. collect print from printer.

optionally adjust image prior to printing.

Are you saying there is no conversion prior to printing.

obviously the printer driver converts the data to whatever format the
printer needs, but that isn't anything that the user sees nor needs to
be concerned about.

whatever software you're using also converts the data to its own native
format. your camera isn't spitting out .psd files.

the user simply opens a raw image, adjusts to taste and prints. done.

they do the same thing with a text file, spreadsheet, 3d graphic or
whatever else. just open the document, adjust if desired, choose print
and collect print.

the point is there is *no* need to save as a jpeg or any other interim
format to print.

So there is a conversion. Once there is a need for conversion, it is
immaterial whether the user does the conversion, or an activated app
does the conversion.

nope.

once again, you're trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

the raw image is converted to pixels on the display and nobody
considers that a conversion. the magnetic fields on the hard drive are
converted to electrical pulses and nobody considers that a conversion.

there's a conversion with *everything* on a computer.

the printer is just another display device that uses paper instead of a
liquid crystal (or crt). apps draw to either or both and may not even
know the difference.

again, the user opens a raw image ...

Opens a raw image in what?

Whatever software you are using. In our case that should be Lightroom.

... (or whatever format, it doesn't even
need to be an image) and picks print and the computer does the rest.

that is not a conversion.

Of course it is.

Your statement is contrary to other comments I have heard.

then you're listening to ignorant people.

Leave out snarky comments.

i'll say whatever i want.

Your attitude adds to your persona. You have a sick and desperate need
for attention. Looks like you have to keep convincing yourself of your
greatness. Too bad others are not so convinced.

the fact that you're resorting to insults shows that you have nothing
whatsoever to refute what i'm saying.

as i said, you're trying to argue for the sake of arguing, and it's
failing.

I don't think you are right about this.

Like me, PeterN is trying to find out how it is possible for a printer
to swallow a raw file and spit out an image. My understanding is that
this is not possible. You seem to be supporting that view by extending
the argument to 'conversion'.

Go to Lightroom and select any NEF or DNG you have available. If you
want to make whatever adjustments and edits you choose to (including
aspect ratio crops) in the Develop Module, or not.

But - but - but .... That is not printing directly from a raw image.
There is the small matter of a huge wad of LR in the way.

OK!
Then connect your camera to your trusty R3880, or use a card reader via
USB and select an NEF to print.
No computer, no Lightroom, no Photoshop.

... and no option to print. Maybe you can do it on your Mac but no
Windows machine that I have seen has the ability to print straight
from a raw file. Presumably your OS has some kind of software which
Windows lacks.

Read what I wrote; "No computer, no Lightroom, no Photoshop." That
means no OS to deal with. No Windows, no OSX. You don't even have to
have the printer connected to your computer.

All you need is a PICTBridge enabled camera and a PICTBridge enabled printer.
All Nikon digital cameras, including the DSLRs are PICTBridge enabled.
If you go to your manual you will find that your D750, along with the
D610, D810, D4S, D300S, my Fujifilm X-E2, and even our antique D70's
are all PICTBridge enabled, and can print to a PICTBridge enabled
printer.
My R2880, & XP-610 are PICTBridge enabled. I am not sure of the
capability of your R3880, or Tony's XP-410.

People are at cross purposes. I've just posted another article on that
subject.

You are too concerned with the mystery of the process.

I beg to differ.

OK! OK! I was just addressing your particular thing. ;-)

Ignoring what you describe as 'the mystery of the process' makes it
possible to make sweeping statements which can neither be discussed
nor defended. Even worse, it enables a person to have completely the
wrong idea about what is going on.

Next go to the print module and you will find that you should have
little trouble printing that NEF, or DNG, all without an intermediate
JPEG phase. As I said I don't have any JPEGs in Lightroom.

As to what Lightroom does as an intermediate phase I have no idea, as
it doesn't leave any evidence of sneakily creating a JPEG without my
knowledge.


--
Regards,

Savageduck