FFR vs FFF

[Whitten]

I saw a Phocus video which suggested deleting your FFR files once you had imported to FFF.
I hate to delete anything, but the YouTuber claimed there was no difference, except the size of the file.
Any advice?

[bmikiten]

I believe it is just a naming convention. I do this all the time.

[SrMi]

I believe FFF is losslessly compressed version and it contains Phocus operations applied to it.

[Whitten]

The FFF files are smaller, not by much. 128mb FFR vs 78mb FFF?

[Whitten]

Maybe I will keep FFR on one HD as a back up.

[tenmangu81]

Maybe I will keep FFR on one HD as a back up.

That's what I am doing. I only use .fff for processing, and I keep .3FR on an external HD, just in case.

[JCM-Photos]

3FR files are useless when you store and backup fff files.

fff files contain all descriptions of Phocus treatment and can be read by any other software (without Phocus treatment)

The advantage of 3FR is that they can contain Phocus mobile 2 treatments that can be replicated in the Phocus desktop fff file or not depending if you check the option when importing or not.

This is a unique flexibility between mobile and desktop treatments

[Whitten]

The FFF is a smaller file size. That's my only concern. Whatever stills or video camera, I have always retained the core, raw files.
Is there any quality difference between the FFR and FFF?

[tenmangu81]

The only thing I know is that when you open .3FR and .fff in Lightroom, there is a slight difference in exposure, and you should compensate it by about 0.4 EV to get the same image.
You can't process .3FR within Phocus without importing them into .fff, as far as I know.

[Whitten]

Yes, I think that's right.

[SrMi]

The only thing I know is that when you open .3FR and .fff in Lightroom, there is a slight difference in exposure, and you should compensate it by about 0.4 EV to get the same image.
You can't process .3FR within Phocus without importing them into .fff, as far as I know.

The difference in brightness is only visible if only one file has lens correction applied.
When I apply lens corrections to the FFF and 3FR files in LrC, I do not see any difference between 3FR and FFF. The histograms are identical.

[tenmangu81]

The only thing I know is that when you open .3FR and .fff in Lightroom, there is a slight difference in exposure, and you should compensate it by about 0.4 EV to get the same image.
You can't process .3FR within Phocus without importing them into .fff, as far as I know.

The difference in brightness is only visible if only one file has lens correction applied.
When I apply lens corrections to the FFF and 3FR files in LrC, I do not see any difference between 3FR and FFF. The histograms are identical.

Not with me....

[SrMi]

The only thing I know is that when you open .3FR and .fff in Lightroom, there is a slight difference in exposure, and you should compensate it by about 0.4 EV to get the same image.
You can't process .3FR within Phocus without importing them into .fff, as far as I know.

The difference in brightness is only visible if only one file has lens correction applied.
When I apply lens corrections to the FFF and 3FR files in LrC, I do not see any difference between 3FR and FFF. The histograms are identical.

Not with me....

Strange. Have you checked that you are using the same profile? Can anyone else see a difference in brightness when importing 3FR and FFF into Lightroom?

[tenmangu81]

The only difference is the white balance temperature, which is different (checked on one image only) between .3FR and .fff.
All other parameters are strictly the same. When increasing the EV of the .fff by 0.4 EV, I get exactly the same image and the same histogram.

[SrMi]

The only difference is the white balance temperature, which is different (checked on one image only) between .3FR and .fff.
All other parameters are strictly the same. When increasing the EV of the .fff by 0.4 EV, I get exactly the same image and the same histogram.

I see only a slight difference in Tint (16 vs. 19 and 7 vs 10) in the examples I tried.