Joanna,
Would you care to elaborate on that statement? My understanding is that for NEF files the only difference between the AdobeRGB and sRGB setting in the camera is the addition of an underscore to the file name and some metadata to indicate which was selected. The setting does not affect the image data.
Joseph
AdobeRGB is a larger colour space, which will yield finer colour graduations.
My “problem” (or at least one of my problems) is that in my photography classes at the University of Michigan, it was beat into my head that the camera is just a tool, similar to the meaning of a wrench to a mechanic. I was supposed to do all the thinking, then make the camera do what I needed it to do. For the types of photos they needed me to make, this was good advice. I took the course twice, first doing things my way (and getting a D), and then forcing myself to do everything as the instructor told me (and getting an A). My thoughts later - I strived to do as “they” had shown me, and I learned to appreciate how and why my old ideas weren’t as good.
Then I got graduated, and got pushed into the real world. Many of my photos were “sports photos” of radio control car racing. I eventually learned how to take the same kinds of images as the experts, and realized all my earlier stuff was little more than snapshots. Then I also started taking machinery photos for work at my “real job”, using a tripod, lighting, and all the other tools to get a photo good enough for a magazine or an article on how the machine worked.
All this stuff left me without much room for “creativity”, and when I was off on my own, like in India. I decided in my mind what I wanted the photo to look like, then set about making it happen.
I like what you wrote, about experimenting with all the “tools” that the manufacturer has provided with my cameras. I didn’t really have time for that before, but since retiring I have lots of time, and now, with the virus going around, I have all the time in the world. The Nikon Df is a very unusual camera in many ways - it’s more like the original Nikon F than it is to all of Nikon’s newest high-tech designs. But someone at Nikon took all the ideas of what a camera might do, and squeezed them into the Df. It came with the same sensor and processor as the Nikon D4, which at the time was the best they had - but the focusing mechanism was more like the Nikon D610, a much less expensive camera. I guess it’s a nice compromise.
Many (most?) of the image enhancing tools on the Df I ignore. I figure I can do that myself in an image editor, currently PL4.
I had no idea that the “jpg adjustments” might have an affect on the raw images. I never thought about that. Thanks for bringing it up. Actually, until lately, I figured all I needed the camera to do was create an acceptable “image” of what I was photographing, and capture enough data on the sensor that later on, I could make a photo the way I want. All the creative work was to be done in the darkroom (now my computer). This dates back to what I learned back in the 1960’s in college.
What I need to do - include all the elements that I might want in my photo, leaving a little “wiggle room” around the edges for cropping if needed. Then, to make sure I include what I want the photo to be about, and if I have time, to exclude anything else that might be distracting. ISO used to be important, but between the capability of the Df, and the noise reduction of PL4, the ISO no longer seems important to me - it has to be whatever is needed to allow me to use my choice of shutter speed and aperture. I used to love morning and evening best for getting photos I liked, but mid-day is also useful for action photos, even if it’s a bad choice for landscapes. I think my hands used to be more steady - now I need to concentrate on holding the camera in a way that it doesn’t move as I’m shooting.
To be honest, I’ve got a whole list of new things to think about, such as what Joanna was teaching me about exposure. I’m always concerned with blowing out the highlights or shadows, but I used to worry more about the shadows. Now I think I’m paying the most attention to the highlights. Nikon even has a software tool for that, and the camera can select a setting that has the best combination for highlights and shadows, and the software can adjust the sensitivity of the pixels such that I capture the most of everything - but that’s only done for a ‘jpg’ image. The camera has another tool that takes two images at different settings (HDR) and combines them into a single image. …but again, that’s back to JPG.
I will follow your advice, and try out all these new tools and settings. Just like having extra lenses with me, it’s nice to have options. Thanks for the suggestion. More things I can do, now that I have the time.
I’m confused. Since I’m no longer sure about this, I changed the setting on my camera from sRGB to AdobeRGB, but since I am only capturing a RAW image, which really only a copy of the data from the camera sensor, how or why would my camera even know which I selected? Maybe this is for the embedded image, but aren’t embedded images sRGB anyway? The only time AdobeRGB is useful is when images are being printed - or am I missing something here?
I don’t think he said that.
George
Are you sure?
in this article:
Citaat:But it’s probably Nikon’s Active D-Lighting system that does the best job of this. It combines up to a 1EV exposure reduction with an adaptive tone curve to give well balanced JPEGs even in high contrast situations.
this is in my eye’s a rawfile effected action!
(if it’s working fine you can using it as a “automated exposure correction tool” i have it active in idyn.)
it will help to prevent blown highlights if you expose as average.
When you go manual just switch to a other customer preset which has it turned off.
That’s what i ment with explore and test. so you can use it to your benefit.
so test your raw-image outcome whit both: D-lighting on and off. see what it brings you.
Well, that makes sense. So from now on I will leave the camera setting on AdobeRGB, which will make no difference until when/if I, or someone else, tries to print it. Sounds like a win/win situation.
How does printing work? If I want to print a raw image, using my computer and a suitable printer, when or how would I specify ‘sRGB’ or ‘AdobeRGB’ ? Is this something the printer software will ask me?
I just checked some of my NEF files with ExifTool and they all show the colour space as AdobeRGB because that is what I chose.
It’s all about getting and keeping the most information possible and the AdobeRGB colour space keeps more. Trust me. I’m a photographer 
For printing, the printer driver will make use of what the file is marked with. You only really consider different colour spaces if you are using software that manages them and can convert between them - something that PL doesn’t do yet.
Well sort off.
i said adjustment setting in camera menu’s who look like only have effect on jpg can be also effecting your rawfile. see my post here:
I completely forgot about active d-lighting. Good to be remembered.
It’s correcting the extremes in the raw data. Both sides.
George
First, here is Nikon’s article explaining active d-lighting:
I’m checking on my camera now, and I have the following settings available:
A Auto
H2 extra high 2
H1 extra high 1
H High
N Normal <-----what my camera is set for
L Low
Off
I can call Nikon on Monday to confirm, but it makes no sense for this to have any influence over the RAW file. By definition, the RAW file is a copy of the data from the sensor, no interpretation.
The line you quoted matches what I think: " It combines up to a 1EV exposure reduction with an adaptive tone curve to give well balanced JPEGs even in high contrast situations."
This confirms it. Since PL4 doesn’t understand color spaces, I should select AdobeRGB in the camera, and that setting sill stick in the image, for possible use later in other situations, such as printing. Thanks! Leaving this set to AdobeRGB doesn’t hurt me now, and may be useful in the future.
I will call Nikon about this on Monday. As I understand it, it can only actually do the correction to the ‘jpg’ images, not to the raw files. The raw file is a measure of the light hitting the sensor.
so if you alter exposure meatering by -1EV what would happen?
please read the article of dpr and click on the links and images to see what i wrote
well i see a test on the horizon… 
(hint look at your shutter times…)
This was my test to proof the theory:
screen dump:
(let’s see yours 
)
My understanding is pretty much what you wrote - the image data is unchanged, but the information is recorded, for future use perhaps in printing. The hardware and software probably need to know which setting was initially selected, so the image can be modified when uploading or printing accordingly, if needed.
It’s becoming chaotic.
First a raw file doesn’t have a color space, except that one of the sensor.
Second one can’t print a raw file: it isn’t an image.
There is d-lighting sec that is applied to the jpg afterwards and there’s active d-ligthing and that’s done on the raw data.
“Active D-Lighting takes place in the camera at the moment the photo is taken and applies digital processing only to the necessary portion(s) of the image. Even when shooting a subject with a wide dynamic range, Active D-Lighting is able to reproduce a realistic image that retains natural contrast—in other words, the picture we saw and set out to capture.”
You can’t undo it.
Yes and no… Apparently it changes the exposure, which means it does have an effect on the metering, and therefore the recorded raw image:
" 7) Active D-Lighting
If you have a Nikon camera, you may have come across the Active D-Lighting setting. At its face, this seems like a JPEG-only setting. And, for the most part, that’s exactly what it is.
Assuming that you don’t change any other settings, your Active D-Lighting has no effect on the RAW data itself. However, it’s a bit more complicated than that.
Depending upon your Active D-Lighting settings, you will change your camera’s metering significantly. I don’t know why Nikon chose to have a JPEG setting affect the metering for RAW photos, but that’s what it does.
At the highest possible Active D-Lighting setting on my camera (Extra High), my metered exposure was a full stop darker than normal! Without Active D-Lighting, I had an exposure of 1/5 second. When I turned it on, the exposure was 1/10 second.
Again, Active D-Lighting does nothing to the RAW data itself. It only affects your camera’s meter. However, the effect is so significant that you need to be very careful to avoid ever setting Active D-Lighting if you shoot in RAW."
From reading the above, I wonder if I should just turn the function OFF unless I’m deliberately shooting JPG images. Maybe I should just configure two camera settings, one for JPG and the other for RAW, so I don’t need to remember all the things to consider changing when/if I switch between jpg and raw…
It sounds like you are right - which goes against the concept of ‘raw’ images as I understood things.
There ought to be a warning about this in the camera.
I need to watch the more advanced version of the Nikon Df videos, and see if it elaborates on this issue. Hopefully today.
Geesh, you turning it backwards.
1 it takes a “normal” meatering and if DR is high active D-lighting tries to fit all in by compensate in EV/time aka shuttertime.
2 it does everything to a rawfile! prefent you from overexposure.
3 it’s in auto modes great for rawfiles. it helps you to have a ETTR as much as possible in high dynamic scenes.
read the DPR article.
I feel compelled to comment on “raw file” not being an image… The same is true for a “jpeg/tiff… file”. Why? They are just files. Some kind of box containing information about an image.
In order to create something that we (humans) comprehend to be an image of someone or something, we need an intermediary that interprets said “information about an image” and rearranges in such ways for us to understand. DPL is such an intermediary, which can also put more info into the box, info conveying our intentions or feelings that e.g. turn the original interpretation (e.g. done by DPL) into art.
One can’t print a raw file? Yes we can, but we’ll not usually get an image that we’ll like because printer drivers are just not smart enough to read our thoughts.
Just for fun:
Crop of a raw image as delivered by intermediary: RawDigger
Crop of a jpg image as delivered by intermediary: iHex
How does this help? Not immediately, but eventually.
