Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
Fuji-RAF

Fujifilm RAW Image

image/x-fuji-raf
VS

Portable Graymap

image/x-portable-graymap
PGM

A complete technical comparison of Fujifilm RAW Image and Portable Graymap — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature Fuji-RAF PGM
Transparency (Alpha) ✕ No ✕ No
Animation Support ✕ No ✕ No
Progressive Loading ✕ No ✕ No
HDR Support Yes Yes
EXIF Metadata Yes ✕ No
ICC Color Profile Yes ✕ No
Fujifilm RAW Image
image/x-fuji-raf
Extension
.raf
Container Proprietary RAF Container
Compression Uncompressed / Lossless Compressed / Lossy Compressed (Modern firmware)
Algorithm
NoneProprietary LosslessProprietary Lossy
Color Depth 14-bit (Per Channel - X-Series), 16-bit (Per Channel - GFX Series)
Developed by Fujifilm Corporation
Released 2000
Magic Bytes
46 55 4A 49 46 49 4C 4D 43 43 44 2D 52 41 57 20
Full Fuji-RAF reference →
Portable Graymap
image/x-portable-graymap
Extension
.pgm
Container Netpbm
Compression Uncompressed
Algorithm
None
Color Depth 8-bit (Grayscale), 16-bit (Grayscale)
Developed by Jef Poskanzer (Netpbm Project)
Released 1988
Magic Bytes
50 32 (ASCII) or 50 35 (Binary)
Full PGM reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser Fuji-RAF PGM
Chrome Chrome
✕ ✕
Firefox Firefox
✕ ✕
Safari Safari
✕ ✕
Edge Edge
✕ ✕
IE IE (Legacy)
✕ ✕
Fuji-RAF

Fuji-RAF Strengths

  • Retains absolute maximum sensor data, enabling massive shadow recovery and highlight protection compared to compressed in-camera JPEGs
  • Stores proprietary Fujifilm Film Simulation metadata (like Classic Chrome or Acros), allowing editors to perfectly replicate in-camera aesthetics
  • Very distinct and reliable magic header makes programmatic file detection foolproof
Limitations
  • Proprietary format requires continuous updates to third-party software (like Lightroom) whenever Fujifilm releases a new camera
  • The X-Trans sensor matrix requires highly specialized demosaicing algorithms that are extremely computationally expensive, leading to slower import and rendering times
  • Completely unsupported in standard web browsers and basic operating system image viewers
PGM

PGM Strengths

  • Extremely simple format allows custom parsers to be written from scratch in minimal time
  • Supports 16-bit precision, making it highly valuable for scientific, medical, and height-map data where 8-bit precision is insufficient
  • ASCII encoding ('P2') allows manual editing and visual inspection of pixel values directly within a text editor
Limitations
  • Strictly limited to grayscale; cannot display color
  • Lack of compression results in massive file sizes, making it entirely impractical for web delivery or consumer storage
  • Does not support alpha transparency or modern metadata structures

When to choose which format

Fuji-RAF
Use Fuji-RAF when…
  • Professional Digital Photography
  • Fujifilm X-Trans Sensor Image Archival
  • High Dynamic Range (HDR) Post-Processing
PGM
Use PGM when…
  • Computer Vision and Machine Learning Pre-processing
  • Scientific and Medical Image Processing
  • Unix/Linux Command-Line Image Pipelines

More comparisons

Fuji-RAF vs ACES → PGM vs ACES → Fuji-RAF vs APNG → PGM vs APNG → Fuji-RAF vs AVCI → PGM vs AVCI → Fuji-RAF vs AVCS → PGM vs AVCS → Fuji-RAF vs AVIF → PGM vs AVIF → All comparisons →
Share this comparison