The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 22, 2014, 02:43:11 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28016 Posts in 5137 Topics by 2912 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
31  Software Discussions / RAW File Converters / Re: DXO DNG Workflow on: February 13, 2007, 07:40:41 AM
Alan

A-HA! Enlightenment.


Thanks for the detail and your efforts.

Chuck
32  Software Discussions / RAW File Converters / Re: DXO DNG Workflow on: February 12, 2007, 10:29:14 AM
Alan
Forgive me for beating a dead horse, but here goes:

1. I have finally figured out that "linear" (as in Linear DNG) has nothing to do with gamma in this context, but really means a demosaiced file. ACR will read and edit such a linear dng, and in fact DxO corrections do appear in that linear dng file. (I don't know what I was doing wrong before, but I did what you did and the corrections do appear.) The term "linear" has appeared in too many contexts without sufficient clarification. I find even Fraser's book confusing on this point.

2. The Bridge and ACR previews do in fact become full size after running the dng file through ACR and then recaching in Bridge.
 also find that the Annotations in the metadata do get stripped as advertised by DxO.

3. The iViewMP preview does then become full size also after a re build.

So all is well.

After running the DXO DNG output through ACR, with my settings for embedded full size DNG, the DXO DNG now includes the full size preview.

But the above quote confuses me one more time. When you say that the DXO DNG now includes the full size preview, do you mean that when you view the DNG file in the DXO viewer you see the full size preview? I still see nothing.

Thanks for your help,

Chuck

33  Software Discussions / RAW File Converters / Re: DXO DNG Workflow on: February 08, 2007, 07:27:08 PM
Hello again:

Here is the response that I received from DxO:

There is a bug in the current program that does not process the DNG file properly in the Viewer.  The development team is working on this and plans to have it corrected in a future update.

By linearized, there are two supported formats for DNG files.  One is mozaic, and the other is linear.  This refers to how the information is written to the file.  In a linear format, the information is written sequentially.

We looked at your images, thank you for sending them, and we checked with our development team.  Because of the way RAW is converted to DNG, there is a difference in contrast between DNG and TIFF and JPEG.  This due to how the processed information is stored in each file and rendered by the RAW converter, in this case the ACR in Bridge.  JPEG and TIFF do not contain the original file information, only processed information.  The DNG contains the original file information which ACR uses, along with the processed information, to render the images you see.  Since Bridge is using an entirely different rendering engine for TIFF and JPEG versus DNG, that is why the contrast between the images is different.

Additional processing for better contrast in Photoshop is left entirely up to you and what you feel is necessary.


By the way, I think they did a pretty good job of looking at my concerns.

So, that clears up things a bit. Linear is Linear, DNG includes both a mosaiced and de-mosaiced form of file, and the output of DxO is indeed a linear dng file. They expect some differences between various renderings, and most interesting is the bug that makes the preview of the dng not available. No mention of the fact that your PC version, Alan, appears to provide it.

I have poured over previous threads in this forum looking for info re DxO and once again went through the old thread in which several of you posted alternative raw conversion results for DxO and other comparisons. What is interesting to me is that nearly everyone who first looks at the DxO outputs gets really excited, and then calms down and pretty much determines that, while there are some neat tricks, the workflow issues seem to overshadow except in certain cases.

So I ran yet another set of test images which were not really very stressful on the systems and had again the same personal response as you all before. I also found that the DxO default results seem to overdo the contrast and the highlight values (blocking). Now I know that can be adjusted and presets can be defined, but I think that is one of the things that gives it an initial WOW factor.

One issue is the claim for noise reduction on a localized basis to minimize overall sharpness and contrast degradation, which might also be a factor here.

I am still looking at a comparison with Canon's Photo Professional results.

We spend way too much time on all these technical things. I am currently studying the works of Cartier-Bresson and may go look for a Leica...

Chuck
34  Software Discussions / RAW File Converters / Re: DXO DNG Workflow on: February 08, 2007, 01:47:23 PM
Peter and Alan
I appreciate the comments. You both are way ahead of me on these issues. I am not bleeding edge, just perhaps bruised and confused.

It took me a while to understand that ACR, or Bridge, will not show the preview generated by the DxO dng format,  and find that I still don't understand the concept of Linearized files. I had presumed that meant the demosaiced file, which includes RGB image data? I have visited the following web site found in a google search for "linearized file":

http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/dng/linear.htm

where there is a discussion of DNG files in two flavors: First is what he calls a "Raw DNG", and second, a "Linear DNG". He claims the first is the more familiar variety containing the raw image plus added-value metadata. The second, the "Linear DNG" is rarer, containing the RGB image data arranged in a rectilinear format...

I have never heard of the first flavor so I presume the second is what we are dealing with when ACR outputs a .dng file. I understand also, now, that when ACR outputs a dng, embedded in it is a full size jpeg preview (I knew that), but that DxO does not.

Regarding the responsiveness of DxO support, they have been cooperating cheerfully, I have uploaded some files to their site for them to play with and compare, but it is slower than I had hoped.

Regarding the version 4.1 preview that Alan mentions, I do not get one (I am on a MAC, DxO version 4.1.1), but the manual that I have (4.1) states that it does indeed  have one, so there seems to be something wrong here.

One general complaint that I have about tech support across the boards is that I rarely get complete answers.

Chuck
35  Software Discussions / RAW File Converters / Re: DXO DNG Workflow on: February 07, 2007, 09:30:12 AM
All:   Just to jump in here with my experiences with DxO, brief but in a state of confusion. I am currently in an email discussion regarding the following problem and if it is of interest I will post the results.

My situation is that I have several times processed in DxO with all three image output formats: jpg, tiff, and dng. (This is DxO version 4.1 on a G5 Mac.) The DxO viewer shows no preview for the dng file. The jpg and the tiff files look similar, but not exact; there are some color shifts.

I then open these files in Bridge and view them in a full size preview and compare them. The dng shows in fact the lens corrections (distortion) but does not show any exposure or brightness corrections; it looks very much like an uncorrected .CR2 file. The jpeg and the tiff output files both show color and brightness corrections ( I am using the "auto" processing here for these comparisons.)

I can certainly open the .dng file in ACR and provide the brightness settings etc., that I want, but that sort of removes part of the attractiveness of the DxO processing.

I am not a regular user of DxO, my workflow is styled after the DAM book and other discussions on this site, but the lens corrections of DxO cannot be matched by ACR and it would be nice to have that option.

The question I am asking DxO is why does the .dng preview seen in Bridge appear to have missed the lighting corrections applied by DxO? Is this just the same problem as the missing previews above? Why is there no preview for the dng outputs in the DxO viewer?

Chuck Brackett
36  Software Discussions / Bridge/ Camera Raw / Re: losing changed star ratings in ACR DNG files on: January 23, 2007, 09:00:04 PM
Peter
I sort of figured out that that is what you are doing. I have always wondered why use the DNG Converter when you are already in ACR and ready to convert..seems to add an extra step. But this may change the way I do things.
Thanks,
Chuck
37  Software Discussions / Bridge/ Camera Raw / losing changed star ratings in ACR DNG files on: January 13, 2007, 09:26:14 PM
I thought I saw a answer to this somewhere but cannot find it.

When I am editing CR2 files in ACR, preparing for DNG conversion, and upon re-evaluation I change some star ratings, those ratings appear to stay with the .CR2 files instead of being embedded in the DNGs. My usual workflow involves saving from ACR to a new folder in order to leave the CR2 files behind. The changed star ratings remain on those .CR2 files rather than going with the converted dng files and I would like to fix that. I am using the save to new location option.

Any suggestions?

Chuck
38  Software Discussions / iView MediaPro / Re: Searching and sorting on Exif metadata on: December 13, 2006, 07:17:38 AM
Well, you learn something every day.

And, Lens does show the focal length range of the lens which is I guess its name, but not the mfg.

Chuck
39  Software Discussions / iView MediaPro / Searching and sorting on Exif metadata on: December 10, 2006, 04:54:19 PM
After using iView now for about one year, I suddenly tried searching and sorting on the Exif metadata, namely focal length for example. I could find no way to do that. Nor could I find anything in the manual. Am I missing it? What else is not available for searching and Sorting?

Chuck Brackett
40  Software Discussions / iView MediaPro / Re: iView Media Pro becoming Microsoft Expression Media on: December 05, 2006, 08:11:58 AM
It would appear to me that the feared Microsoft - Windows alliance has overtaken us and will continually work to oust Mac users, or at least make it a lot less efficient ($$) to Mac users. Microsoft has never, ever, been user friendly.

So, I would raise the question: What other choices do we now have that would support pretty much the same features as iView? DNG support is essential. Who else? Cry

Chuck
41  Software Discussions / iView MediaPro / iView Custom HTML Templates and © annotations on: October 10, 2006, 07:44:24 PM
I have been having trouble using the © symbol (from the IPTC copyright field) in custom templates, and after much discussion with iView support and nosing around, I have determined that the appropriate Character Set is UTF-8, whereas the assigned default set in some of the templates is set to  ISO-8859-1 or the like.

The problem shows up as an extra character, in my case a A with a ^ on top, preceding the © symbol. This does not necessarily show up when the © is entered into a text statement, but certainly does when copying it from the copyright field whether hand entered in that field, or using the © code, or whatever.

The problem is completely corrected if the character set of the template is set to utf-8.

I was put on to this by viewing posts on the iView Forums for two years and finding that many had found this same problem, and then when iView support told me that the character set should be utf-8. They were not aware that the templates did not all have that designation.

Note, that I am talking about the templates that are downloaded from the iView website for customization, not the ones included in the application.

If this is widely known, sorry. But iView did not seem aware of and plan to fix it.

Chuck
42  Software Discussions / iView MediaPro / Re: iView integration with other software such as Qimage on: April 26, 2006, 01:57:30 AM
OK, I have looked at the ImagePrint website but do not find any mention of that useage (beyond 44 inches) and it does not support the R1800. My volume on these particular images is low so the difficulty of the Virtual PC / Qimage is not a particularly big problem. I am a bit put off by the $995 price tag also, and then an additional $200 for the print through added feature, even if it did print on an R1800.

Chuck
43  Software Discussions / iView MediaPro / Re: iView integration with other software such as Qimage on: April 26, 2006, 01:38:23 AM
Peter
Qimage is a RIP that has many features, as noted, but one that I use it for is that it allows one to overcome the 44" limit on print length that Epson has imposed on the printer that I use (R1800). Using Qimage I have printed as large as 60 inches for some panorama work. The biggest problem is that they do not have to my knowledge a Mac version, nor plans to develop one, so I end up having to use Vitural PC to run it, or export it to a PC. It is a very reasonably priced program compared with the RIPs that I know of for the Mac.

Do you have any info on software that fills this need that runs on the Mac?

Chuck
44  Software Discussions / Bridge/ Camera Raw / Re: Shooting tethered with Bridge? on: April 26, 2006, 01:28:47 AM
Regarding shooting tethered with Canon camera and software:

Canon provides their EOS software with a function called EOS Utility that does a very nice job of shooting and downloading images for viewing and does so in quite a short time, however, there are some problems. The first is that it does not work at all with the latest upgrade to the Macintosh OSX software version 10.4.6 when running on the Intel based Macintoshes. I have just gone through this cycle of upgrading to version 10.4.6 and found that the Canon Utility would not communicate with the camera, couldn't even find it. Canon Tech Support informed me that this is an "issue" which usually means that they know they have a serious problem but haven't yet addressed it. They have now confirmed to me that they have no date for even working on the issue and they do not "Officially" admit that the problem exists.

So, that meant rolling the system update back to version 10.4.5 which came with the MacBook Pro, which for some strange reason turned into a complete reformatting of the hard drive and reinstall of the whole setup. Being a Mac, it all went pretty well but I am dismayed that Canon has not kept up with their software development and don't even let the public know there is a problem.

Now that I am back in 10.4.5, everything is working fine again.

Chuck Brackett
45  Software Discussions / Bridge/ Camera Raw / Re: Shooting tethered with Bridge? on: April 08, 2006, 09:48:35 PM
So what are the preferred methods for reviewing shots on loction as they are shot?

Card Readers and drop the files on the desktop? Is there nothing more streamlined than that?

Chuck Brackett
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!