Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
Fuji-RAF

Fujifilm RAW Image

image/x-fuji-raf
VS

PWG Raster Format

image/pwg-raster
PWG-Raster

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

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature Fuji-RAF PWG-Raster
Transparency (Alpha) ✕ No ✕ No
Animation Support ✕ No ✕ No
Progressive Loading ✕ No ✕ No
HDR Support Yes ✕ No
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 →
PWG Raster Format
image/pwg-raster
Extension
.pwg.ras
Container CUPS Raster v2 Container
Compression PackBits (Run-Length Encoding)
Algorithm
PackBits (Apple RLE variant)
Color Depth 1-bit (Monochrome/K), 8-bit (Grayscale), 24-bit (sRGB / Adobe RGB), 32-bit (CMYK)
Developed by IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group (PWG)
Released 2011
Magic Bytes
52 61 53 32
Full PWG-Raster reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser Fuji-RAF PWG-Raster
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
PWG-Raster

PWG-Raster Strengths

  • The undisputed global standard for modern, driverless printing environments, eliminating the nightmare of installing manufacturer-specific print drivers
  • Extremely lightweight to decode on embedded hardware, requiring minimal RAM buffers on the printer side
  • Strict color space and resolution rules guarantee that the printed output will successfully process without syntax errors
Limitations
  • Generates massive file sizes and network payloads compared to vector-based formats like PDF or PostScript, as every page is fully rasterized at 300+ DPI before transmission
  • No support for native rendering in web browsers, image viewers, or graphic design software without specialized CUPS developer tools
  • Cannot store complex metadata, vector text, or layers

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
PWG-Raster
Use PWG-Raster when…
  • Driverless Network Printing (IPP Everywhere)
  • Apple AirPrint and Mopria Print Service Pipelines
  • CUPS (Common UNIX Printing System) Spooling

More comparisons

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