Can I edit CR2 using GIMP?

[Jacki]

I just started shooting in RAW format. For all my jpeg pictures, I use GIMP to edit. Buying photoshop or anything like that is not an option right now.

Anyway, I have the Canon Zoombrowser that lets you view and do limited editing on CR2 files, but I want to transfer the image to GIMP and edit it before I jpeg it. So, I opened my test RAW image in Zoombrowser, developed the RAW image, and then clicked the option to edit with an external image editor, choosing GIMP as my editor. I then get this pop up message: "TIFF IMAGE MESSAGE: Cannot handle zero number of strips." Another "Import from tiff" box pops up, asking me if I want to open as layers or images. If I click import on this box, the image shows up in GIMP...but did I do this right?

I know there are a couple of plugins you can get that let you edit RAW in GIMP, but I figured I already have zoombrowser, why get more RAW file readers? I was hoping to make these two work together if possible.

So, in case that didn't make sense, my main question here is: For those of you who edit you RAW files in GIMP, could you walk me through how to do it. Please? :blushing:

 

[Big Mike]

I think you need to think about RAW files a little differently. RAW (.CR2 in your case) isn't really an image format. It's just a bunch of 'un-cooked' data from the camera. You can see/preview the image, but that is just an embedded JPEG, not the actual image file.

When you open a RAW file, in Zoombrowser for example, you can make adjustment and so on. But to take it further, it needs to be 'cooked' (converted into an actual image file). It seems like the default is TIFF format.

So for you to take the photo from a RAW file in zoombrowser, into GIMP (or anywhere) the file needs to be processed into a proper image file. This means that it's no longer a RAW file and you can't make the non-destructive RAW edits. So the key is to make as many adjustments as you can, while it's still in the RAW stage. Then you can take it into another program for further editing.

It does make sense to use TIFF format when converting the RAW for further editing. TIFF does not lose data like JPEG does. So choose the TIFF conversion when you transfer/export the image.

You can save it as a JPEG from GIMP, if that is what you need as your final file format. You might want to save/keep the TIFF file as well, but those files will be huge and take up a lot of space.

 

[Jacki]

Ahhh, thank you very much, that definitely answers my question. So, I will do as much as I can in Zoombrowser, edit the tiff format of the picture in GIMP, and then save as a jpeg.

I don't really need to have my pictures be in jpeg format, so much as I am used to them being in jpeg.

 

[Big Mike]

There is nothing wrong with JPEG, but it's a 'lossy' format...meaning that every time you save it, it looses something. You could probably save it many times over before actually noticing any quality loss, but it's just good practice to avoid loosing data.

So TIFF is a good option for a 'working file'. Something that you will save, close then come back to later. However, if you are done with your editing and aren't worried about coming back to reedit it, then it might be a good idea to save it as a JPEG and delete the TIFF file so that you don't end up with a harddrive full of TIFF files that you never use.

 

[Xyloz]

Lossy is great for basic license release to use.
Tiff is what you give for people who have bought the license to use and edit
and RAW is what you give when they buy the outright photo on proviso that you can have a Jpeg copy for portfolio.


Sorry to say but, if your having to edit your photos then your not a good enough photographer full stop.

Everything you need to get good a good image is in real life, post effects reduce the overall quality and value of the image.

If there is someone in your shot you don't want, then remove them by asking, it's faster, ad obviously more realistic than a clone stamp and saves time in post.
If there is an item in the way of a shot, move yourself don't remove it! Edit only if necessary, don't be a lazy photographer because it costs you.

And here is how:
You need to boost your price to compensate for editing time but if your taking more than 2 shots like in (HDR) you have wasted the value of the third photo here is why:

If your doing a complex effect like a Special effect, High Dynamic Range or Element Editing then adding a single editing cost won't help:

This shot required took 5 pictures of different poses to mash together of me alone, and then about 50 stock images of mechanical parts under the right lighting.
Thats 57 photos in one give or take for a few that were binned during edit.

I posted it before as an example of planning as it is still not finished but this is also a good example of how many photos are needed for a single effect.
Steam Punk at heart | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Editing is charged on top of your photography, you include in the editing costs,wit overheads and markup. After this your roughly drawing less than even with one photo less the rest you include so for every other photo your adding your removing the value of that photo entirely.

This means that I can make room for the value of one photo in a whole days worth of professional editing!

How many photos can I take in a day? A lot, so I am losing out becuase I am editing and so are you.

For special effects you have very little choice about editing. You can augment editing time with make up and clothing but effects require digital manipulation.


Your static photos need to be hot off the camera and sizzle as they are, they only need *processing* into their output formats

Converting the Craw to Tiff is an edit under the bracket of processing, and takes time but you can save this via Batch, if you are good enough then you will only need batch processing jobs for everything else your wasting your time, because the computer can batch process while your out doing another shoot!

If you are manipulating the image then you aren't working with a photo you are working as an artist.
If your a photographer you sell photos not digital art.

Sad fact is alot of photographers online are not taught this distinction and waste a good day sat in a small room on thier arse taking time to tweak one photo because they haven't got the skills to make it good through the camera they have to edit and as a Multimedia Designer I can see it.
It takes a week to build a full port folio of good photography if you have the drive and if you have the drive you will be selling those photos, to magazines and newspapers and clients.

Also Who am I to tell you your wrong well...
First and foremost I am a Multimedia Designer, by profession I can use all adobe programs in the master collection and including indesign, I can also 3D model in Max Maya and Cinema 4D I have 5 years hands on experience with rigging film sets for studio and on location shooting, for moving an still pictures.

I know a lorry load about post poduction costs and editing solutions and what makes a good photographer good.

Common signs of photoshop tampering and bad photography are things like:
Eyes being too bright or contrasted and way to sharp compared to the model, skin too matte -
no lines or character in the face of the model
flat features or too much contrast to compensate for the fact the air brushing has been used,
forced emotion in the model,
cartoon style proportions and colours,
sespension of disbelief in the reality of the scene,
Worst of all, people are looking at the effects added over the total image like "wow look at how clear her eyes are".

Here is an image I mocked up recently as a parody of this effect I did the other day in a tutorial I was doing for 2 photographers working for a local magazine as a demo, and yes I do want to teach.
Login | Facebook

Who am I to tell you your wrong in editing???
Well if you followed that link in a new tab, click to the next on the photo, I am the guy with a greenpatch on my left arm standing between two guys.

That green patch is a signed photo pass and those Guys are Jaret and Eric from Bowling For Soup.
Thats who I am as a photographer someone who turns up at a gig with just a camera and a ticket, and gets a signed photopass and meets the band.

You are the sum of your actions and if your editing then your photography skills are faked, and if your photography is fake then your a phoney simple as that, you need to stop worrying about post editing, that won't help you get that dynamic range in batch, just serve to under mine your own talent and waste your valuable shooting time.

 

[KmH]

Sorry to say but, if your having to edit your photos then your not a good enough photographer full stop.

Yes, you should be sorry for saying that, because it's utter nonsense, full stop. :er: The fact is, it depends on the final usage of an image.

It seems you are saying photographers are not artists?

Image editing/manipluation occurs and is necessary both pre process before the shutter is released, and post process.

Every Raw file needs to be edited, post process, to some extent. For professional grade work, the bare minimums are: setting the white balance, capture sharpening, and setting the white/black points for each series. Fortunately, as you mention, professional editing tools let one do those kinds of repetitive tasks in a batch mode. So to an extent your post is contradictory, not to mention well beyond the scope of the question the OP had.

Additional post process editing are often required based on usage and client requirements.

 

[DaveInMD]

Sorry to say but, if your having to edit your photos then your not a good enough photographer full stop.

Yes, you should be sorry for saying that, because it's utter nonsense, full stop. :er:

I found this forum while searching for how I might be able to read a CR2 file so I don't to wait until I'm back at my own PC. I don't normally pile on, but I actually joined this forum just so I could say "Amen" to your post. Full stop

 

[Josh66]

If you want to do it all in GIMP, you need a plugin called UFRaw, full stop.

It can be used on it's own as a stand-alone program, or as a plugin from within GIMP.

You can also batch process from the command line with it - which could be useful if you want to batch process a whole folder of RAWs without actually having to open them all. Not sure how you would go about doing that in Windows though ... I run linux...

 

[analog.universe]

I use UFRaw > GIMP for all of my images. Great setup, and especially great for not costing anything.

 

[mfo]

+1 UFRaw plugin.

 

[mulletbay1]

If you want to do it all in GIMP, you need a plugin called UFRaw, full stop.

It can be used on it's own as a stand-alone program, or as a plugin from within GIMP.

You can also batch process from the command line with it - which could be useful if you want to batch process a whole folder of RAWs without actually having to open them all. Not sure how you would go about doing that in Windows though ... I run linux...

Hi,

I would like to know if you can lend a hand.
Using wind. 7 64bit, I am having a difficult time getting uraw to work w/ or w/o gimp.
WhenI try and open my Canon raw files I get .dll errors, cannot recognize etc.
Any help is appreciated.


P.S. I had seen a post of yours in a forum.


Thank you,
William
[email protected]

 

[Josh66]

Not sure how much I can help - my Windows 7 experience is limited to opening the DVD tray and popping a Linux Mint disk in, then rebooting...

Missing .dll's means something is messed up in your registry though, I think.
I think once you fix that, it should work.


Do they open using the software that came with the camera (if you have it)?

Have you tried reinstalling GIMP and UFRaw? (I wouldn't think you would have to, but I don't know what else it could be...)

 

[jowensphoto]

Sorry to say but, if your having to edit your photos then your not a good enough photographer full stop.

Everything you need to get good a good image is in real life, post effects reduce the overall quality and value of the image.

Sorry to say this, but if you don't know what you're talking about, then don't talk. Full stop/fool stop.

Post processing isn't something that came along with digital photography. PP is used on film too, in the darkroom. Just because it's done with chemicals instead of a computer doesn't mean it's not essentially the same thing.

 

[jowensphoto]

If you're interested, here's an article about jpeg degradation.
JPEG Image Compression Degradation