Raw, mraw e sraw

“ Since the pixel image represented by sRaw has not had the "color correction" aspect of scaling applied (only the part that recognizes the differing sensitivities of the three classes of sensels), has not been transformed to recognize the primaries of the destination color space, and carries the data in a linear form, at 14-bit precision, we can use it in much the way we can use the raw data itself?assuming that we are willing to end up with an image of half the resolution of that which 5 Or, if you are a masochist, see "Chrominance Subsampling", by this same author. The Canon sRaw and mRaw Output Formats Page 16 would have been developed from the Raw data. And we can do this with a file about half the size of the Raw file for the same shot. There are many discussions about whether this is actually of any value. Some point out the compromises of the chrominance subsampling. Some point out that we no longer have the chance to apply a "superior" demosaicing algorithm, if we can find one. (However, as I pointed out above, demosaicing in this situation is essentially trivial?we really have a tristimulus pixel sensor array for this image size.) Many comment that the designation?sRaw?is inappropriate, suggesting that the file contains "raw" data, which is usually considered to mean the original sensor outputs. Still, the image represented by the data in the sRaw file isn't "fully done" yet?it is perhaps "precooked", maybe "a little raw". Many point out that the seeming point of this?to give the benefit of greater flexibility in image development with a file half the size of a Raw file (for an image with one-fourth the number of pixels)?is greatly diluted by the availability today at modest cost of camera memory cards with very large storage capacity. (I won't quote any prices?they will seem silly by the time anybody reads this.) „