Mike Chaney's Tech Corner
September 21, 2020, 01:07:09 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Feb 2013: Qimage Ultimate Challenges... have fun and explore features!
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Download and develop photos from your flash cards with one click!
Get a trial of
FlashPipe today and stop fumbling with explorer windows to transfer photos and videos
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
Author Topic: v2012.219 issues/comments  (Read 21442 times)
DdeGannes
Full Member
***
Posts: 169


Retired Banker; Golf; Photography; Travel.


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: July 13, 2012, 12:34:43 AM »

Since I updated to V2012.219 I have noticed a magenta cast in the cloud area of images with sky in the scene. Olympus .orf raw files. This does not happen with if I use any of my other raw conversion software, LR 4.1; Capture One Express; SilkyPix 4; AfterShot Pro.  see the attached screen capture.

 
Logged

COMP EQP: iMac 27" mid 2015 5K Retina macOS 10.15.5, 24GB Ram; Scan Elite 5400 film scr.
CAMERA EQP: Oly OMD EM-1, Digital Zuiko & OM lenses.
Imaging Apps: PS CC 20; LR Classic CC 9.3; Qimage U & One; VueScan.
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5323



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #16 on: July 13, 2012, 09:12:50 AM »

Hi Dennis,
I see it in your screen snap too.

As you know, 2012.219 incorporated the new DCRAW that was revised from previous releases.
So it is certainly to be checked out.

Is that .ORF file small enough to email?  If not you can send it free of charge using https://www.wetransfer.com/

You can send it me if you would. I'll see that Mike gets it as soon as he is available this morning.
You can send it to both of us, but he has such an elaborate email filtering system (as he gets tons of useless emails) (plus spam filters) that I am afraid that an email notice of a waiting to be DOWNLOADED file might slip through the cracks.

Thanks,
Fred
Logged
DdeGannes
Full Member
***
Posts: 169


Retired Banker; Golf; Photography; Travel.


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: July 13, 2012, 10:25:23 AM »

Thanks Fred.
I have sent the file via. yousendit.com and you should get the link to download shortly.
Logged

COMP EQP: iMac 27" mid 2015 5K Retina macOS 10.15.5, 24GB Ram; Scan Elite 5400 film scr.
CAMERA EQP: Oly OMD EM-1, Digital Zuiko & OM lenses.
Imaging Apps: PS CC 20; LR Classic CC 9.3; Qimage U & One; VueScan.
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5323



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #18 on: July 13, 2012, 10:29:17 AM »

Quote
I have sent the file via. yousendit.com and you should get the link to download shortly.

Got it.!!

Thanks,
Will make sure Mike gets it ASAP, but it will be 4 more hours before he gets to see it.

Fred
Logged
atodzia
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: July 13, 2012, 02:09:32 PM »

Fred,

The Canon 5D Mark III has this new, extremely useful feature of in camera HDR taking 3 exposures either in Auto mode or +1, 2, or 3 EV increments. It does the processing immediately for Jpegs but you can choose to save all three exposures if shooting RAW and then combine them in the Canon DPP software. It really works well and if it has a self align feature which I always leave on so if you are hand holding the camera the three frames are correctly aligned during processing. It is one of the greatest features Canon has added in a while besides the usual expected features such as auto-focus speed, shots per sec, etc. It works really well and can produce shots that in the past had to be attempted using clumsy HDR tools from other companies. I use this feature much more than I ever tried to use after the fact HDR tools.

Andy

P.S. I think something is really screwed up with the the latest version of Dcraw for some new cameras.
Logged
admin
Administrator
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3132



View Profile Email
« Reply #20 on: July 13, 2012, 02:33:43 PM »

P.S. I think something is really screwed up with the the latest version of Dcraw for some new cameras.

Not at all.  I've tested it on the 5D Mark III, the D800, and a folder with hundreds of raws from dozens of cameras to compare results of the latest version with previous versions and it performs as well on those as it always has.  In fact, that's the first test I always perform when updating dcraw: I go to my folder of raws I've collected from many cameras over the years and develop all of them with the new version.  Of 216 raw photos from roughly 100 cameras, the new dcraw rendered 214 of 216 exactly the same as the previous version (and I don't just mean "visually": files were a 100% match).  And the two it didn't: whatever bit level changes were present were not visible.  Only down side is that files from cameras like the D800 are so large that they can take 30 seconds or longer to develop on pretty capable machines.

BTW, Dennis, I tried your ORF from this thread in an older version of Studio: it renders it the same way; too red.  Looks like a white balance problem since it has nothing to do with the latest update.  The embedded JPEG is also red, but not as bad.  Has the ORF been modified/resaved in any way?  It's possible that dcraw can't find the white balance values if the ORF isn't straight from the memory card.

Mike
Logged
DdeGannes
Full Member
***
Posts: 169


Retired Banker; Golf; Photography; Travel.


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2012, 02:44:06 PM »


BTW, Dennis, I tried your ORF from this thread in an older version of Studio: it renders it the same way; too red.  Looks like a white balance problem since it has nothing to do with the latest update.  The embedded JPEG is also red, but not as bad.  Has the ORF been modified/resaved in any way?  It's possible that dcraw can't find the white balance values if the ORF isn't straight from the memory card.

Mike

The WB is from the memory card so I do not think its the white balance reading. I also sent Fred a screen shot from LR 4.1 processing which is done "as shot" he should have the e-mail I sent with it. Thanks for looking.
Logged

COMP EQP: iMac 27" mid 2015 5K Retina macOS 10.15.5, 24GB Ram; Scan Elite 5400 film scr.
CAMERA EQP: Oly OMD EM-1, Digital Zuiko & OM lenses.
Imaging Apps: PS CC 20; LR Classic CC 9.3; Qimage U & One; VueScan.
admin
Administrator
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3132



View Profile Email
« Reply #22 on: July 13, 2012, 03:01:25 PM »


BTW, Dennis, I tried your ORF from this thread in an older version of Studio: it renders it the same way; too red.  Looks like a white balance problem since it has nothing to do with the latest update.  The embedded JPEG is also red, but not as bad.  Has the ORF been modified/resaved in any way?  It's possible that dcraw can't find the white balance values if the ORF isn't straight from the memory card.

Mike

The WB is from the memory card so I do not think its the white balance reading. I also sent Fred a screen shot from LR 4.1 processing which is done "as shot" he should have the e-mail I sent with it. Thanks for looking.

OK, but all versions of dcraw render it red.  Even ones from 2008.  Do all your ORF's from that camera have a color balance issue?  Did you update the firmware on the camera recently?  I still think that something with that particular ORF causes dcraw to not be able to read the WB values.

Mike
Logged
DdeGannes
Full Member
***
Posts: 169


Retired Banker; Golf; Photography; Travel.


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: July 13, 2012, 03:27:23 PM »

I had seen similar issues while I was working with Bibble 5 for a while but it finally got corrected in one of the later releases. I usually shoot with my WB set to auto and do not normally have problems, if necessary switch the lighting condition in post e.g. Daylight, shade, flash etc.   
Logged

COMP EQP: iMac 27" mid 2015 5K Retina macOS 10.15.5, 24GB Ram; Scan Elite 5400 film scr.
CAMERA EQP: Oly OMD EM-1, Digital Zuiko & OM lenses.
Imaging Apps: PS CC 20; LR Classic CC 9.3; Qimage U & One; VueScan.
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5323



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #24 on: July 13, 2012, 03:45:30 PM »

Quote
Do all your ORF's from that camera have a color balance issue?  Did you update the firmware on the camera recently?  I still think that something with that particular ORF causes dcraw to not be able to read the WB values.

Dennis, I think Mike needs the rest of the above info.
All the Orfs read on the warm side or just this one??
Fred
Logged
atodzia
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: July 13, 2012, 03:53:23 PM »

When you do a 100% zoom on files with good exposure taken with the 5D Mark III at ISO 1600 and below do they look sharp to you? I tried a few files and compare it to Canon's software and they didn't look sharp at all. It looked like a different camera or lens was used. (?)

P.S. I think something is really screwed up with the the latest version of Dcraw for some new cameras.

Not at all.  I've tested it on the 5D Mark III, the D800, and a folder with hundreds of raws from dozens of cameras to compare results of the latest version with previous versions and it performs as well on those as it always has.  In fact, that's the first test I always perform when updating dcraw: I go to my folder of raws I've collected from many cameras over the years and develop all of them with the new version.  Of 216 raw photos from roughly 100 cameras, the new dcraw rendered 214 of 216 exactly the same as the previous version (and I don't just mean "visually": files were a 100% match).  And the two it didn't: whatever bit level changes were present were not visible.  Only down side is that files from cameras like the D800 are so large that they can take 30 seconds or longer to develop on pretty capable machines.

BTW, Dennis, I tried your ORF from this thread in an older version of Studio: it renders it the same way; too red.  Looks like a white balance problem since it has nothing to do with the latest update.  The embedded JPEG is also red, but not as bad.  Has the ORF been modified/resaved in any way?  It's possible that dcraw can't find the white balance values if the ORF isn't straight from the memory card.

Mike
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3196



View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: July 13, 2012, 04:49:27 PM »

Quote
When you do a 100% zoom on files with good exposure taken with the 5D Mark III at ISO 1600 and below do they look sharp to you? I tried a few files and compare it to Canon's software and they didn't look sharp at all. It looked like a different camera or lens was used. (?)
I said in an earlier post that the Canon DPP software applies much heavier sharpening by default.
See attached shot taken in low light: 1600 iso, 1/12th sec hand held, f5.6 with a 600D and  a Canon 15-85 lens. Screen shot for QU comparator at 100%.
You can see the difference, the DPP version has significant black halos around the white candles, that's over sharpened in my book.
The QU version did have some additional sharpening applied in the editor.
Terry
Logged
atodzia
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: July 13, 2012, 05:05:45 PM »

When I have time I'll see if I can put together a similar compare shot. I think what I am seeing is more than just a sharpness difference, but maybe not.
Logged
DdeGannes
Full Member
***
Posts: 169


Retired Banker; Golf; Photography; Travel.


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: July 13, 2012, 05:30:49 PM »

Quote
Do all your ORF's from that camera have a color balance issue?  Did you update the firmware on the camera recently?  I still think that something with that particular ORF causes dcraw to not be able to read the WB values.

Dennis, I think Mike needs the rest of the above info.
All the Orfs read on the warm side or just this one??
Fred
1. No, 2. No, 3. Do you wish me to send some other raw files?

Additional info at 2.20pm. On making further checks, I agree with Mike, if appears that for some files Qimage is not reading the White Balance correctly, while other software do not display the same problem.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2012, 06:24:48 PM by DdeGannes » Logged

COMP EQP: iMac 27" mid 2015 5K Retina macOS 10.15.5, 24GB Ram; Scan Elite 5400 film scr.
CAMERA EQP: Oly OMD EM-1, Digital Zuiko & OM lenses.
Imaging Apps: PS CC 20; LR Classic CC 9.3; Qimage U & One; VueScan.
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5323



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #29 on: July 13, 2012, 05:34:29 PM »

Sure, two recent and two a year old if you can
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!