EOS 6D Raw file editing

[Johnmoore20]

Hello,

Has anyone had problems opening raw file from a 6D in photoshop elements?  I have a new 6D and raw files will not open but they do from my 60D any help appreciated.

[RobertTheFat]

I believe the 6D is newer than the 60D, and newer models often have slightly different RAW file formats. Possibly you need a newer edition of PSE.

[Johnmoore20]

Thank you Bob,

I think I will move to lightroom and hope all will be solved.  Just wish people would leave file formats alone.

[cicopo]

Before you do that check whether Adobe has a newer version of ACR (Adobe Camera RAW) for your version of Elements. If it isn't too old that may be available free.

[kvbarkley]

It is not the file format, the problem is that each camera has a different response and has to be individually adjusted in the RAW software. The software could easily use the 60D raw converter to convert the 6D, but it would look like garbage.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@kvbarkley wrote:

It is not the file format, the problem is that each camera has a different response and has to be individually adjusted in the RAW software. The software could easily use the 60D raw converter to convert the 6D, but it would look like garbage.

---

And how is that different from saying that the two cameras have a slightly different RAW file format?

[kvbarkley]

Because it matters to a computer software writer like me. 8^)  The only difference in the files (other than the actual image data) is the name of the camera. In other words, .cr2 is a true file format, which can be parsed the the same for eevery camera. In fact, the Raw "reader" on iOS simply displays the embedded JPEG.

[Waddizzle]

---

@kvbarkley wrote:

Because it matters to a computer software writer like me. 8^)  The only difference in the files (other than the actual image data) is the name of the camera. In other words, .cr2 is a true file format, which can be parsed the the same for eevery camera. In fact, the Raw "reader" on iOS simply displays the embedded JPEG.

---

You're describing the metadata associated with the file as being different, not the actual embedded image content.  Your argument above says that the actual two image formats would be identical.

[kvbarkley]

There are two things operating here.
1. The .cr2 format stays pretty much the same. Once you know how to read one, you can read them all and get the image data and metadata out of the file.

2. Each model of camera is different in ways that are not captured in the .cr2 file. For example, the Bayer array might have slightly different colors, or the individual rgb pixels might be offset from one sensor to another.

So, after you read the image data, you have to apply what you know from profiling the camera in order to produce an image from the RAW file. In fact, this is the whole point of DNG's they were to standardize this so that you could just process the RAW from any camera, but no one got on board.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@kvbarkley wrote:

Because it matters to a computer software writer like me. 8^)  The only difference in the files (other than the actual image data) is the name of the camera. In other words, .cr2 is a true file format, which can be parsed the the same for eevery camera. In fact, the Raw "reader" on iOS simply displays the embedded JPEG.

---

Well, to someone like me who spent quite a few years as a software writer, it sounds like a distinction without a difference. The fact is that when new cameras come out, their .CR2 files are often sufficiently incompatible with their similarly named predecessors that a new release of Digital Photo Professional has to be issued with the ability to read them. You can make of that what you will, but I think it's quite a stretch to claim that all .CR2 files "can be parsed the same for every camera." And the fact that the display of a .CR2 file is (sometimes) based on the embedded JPEG is, I think, irrelevant.