Question about ORF vs. NEF files

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by Replytoken, Jun 12, 2012.

  1. Replytoken

    Replytoken Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 7, 2012
    Puget Sound
    Ken
    While my E-PL2 ORF files about the same size as my Nikon D300 NEF files, approximately 10MB, they seem to be significantly slower when I am reviewing/culling them with FastStone prior to renaming/DNG conversion in ImageIngester. They are also slower to load into ImageIngester than the NEF files. It is not a card issue as I have moved the files to my primary HD for processing. Has anybody else experienced this? I am wondering if it has to do with how each file handles its embedded preview, and perhaps the NEF files are more efficient. Any thoughts?

    --Ken
     
  2. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    I think it's got far more to do with how your RAW converter/editor handles generating previews than anything else. OS X (with the latest raw update) displays the previews in Finder, so I use that for an initial cull and process in lightroom (until DxO releases E-M5 support this summer at least..)
     
  3. Replytoken

    Replytoken Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 7, 2012
    Puget Sound
    Ken
    Mattia,

    I am wondering if Nikon's embedded previews are either smaller files, or more readily available to programs. They seem to display quite fast. My Oly previews seem to take forever.

    --Ken
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.