1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

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