Mike Chaney's Tech Corner

http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage-u

v2013.106    12/11/12

Priority: Low

v2013.106 includes the following:

    New filter toggle tool: Right click on the yellow button on the filter preview in the image editor and choose any filter.  Then hold the yellow button to toggle that filter on/off to review its effect!

    Raw update: Raw support has either been added or fixed for the following cameras:

    Leica V-LUX3
    Nikon D800E
    Samsung NX1000
    Sony DSC-RX100 (AWB only: dcraw does not currently support camera WB for the RX100)

Mike

Ugh!

Take 3 since files on this site must be less than 256KB total and not per image.

First is the TIFF which is normal in the right window.

Mack

Now the new "Squarish NEF image" out of the D800E shown on the right.  It opens normally (4:3 ratio or whatever it is) in the Editor part.  I did the Refresh and Rebuild of the thumbnails to no avail.

The magenta and black lines are still showing in the upper part of the images though.  You can see a bit of it at the top of the washed out NEF's in the Viewer side.

Mack

Hi Mack,
No problems here with he sample images I have. There are no extra magenta or black borders after using View menu, RE-Build Thumbs. Page preview is normal too.
Not sure what is happening with your distorted page preview image; have you tried other sizes and crop off?
Terry

Terry,

I discovered some oddity.

If the image is shot and shown in the portrait mode, and I can see the black/magenta bars at the top of the image in the Viewer or Browser window, then the image will open as a square in the the right pane window.  Double-clicking into Editor shows it normal sized along with the bars at the top.

However, if the NEF image was shot and displayed in landscape mode, the bars do not show in the Viewer and the image opens normally in the right pane and Editor both.

I don't know why turning the camera to portrait mode causes the black/magenta lines to show in the NEF files at the top in the Viewer, but no bars and looks normal if shot in Landscape mode.

Seems something happens when flipping from landscape to portrait causing this?  ???  I think there is something in the camera or software that knows to flip and display a portrait mode shot in a view pane in the portrait mode and not landscape? I can't recall if I flipped them into portrait display with the viewer or it does it automatically?  I think Windows or its viewer rotate the NEFs into the proper postiton and write something to the NEF so it will always do that?  Maybe that's where the bars and the odd square info is getting in from.  I dunno.

I also need to run images straight out of the camera and not process them in Capture NX2 also, but I think the ones on the external hard drive are unprocessed.  Will run some tests tomorrow straight out of the camera in portrait and landscape and some through ViewNX2 and Capture NX2 to see what happens with those bars.


Mack

Terry,

Found an original NEF demonstrating the portrait NEF issue.

The black bar circled in red in the first NEF shows the image as a square on the right.  The other two NEF's in the viewer (dark images shot in Landscape mode) do not have the black bar and open normal sized as expected.

The JPG next to the black bar NEF one does not have the bar either and opens normally too.  The JPG was shot on the SD card and the NEF on the CF card.

Just checked the image in Adobe Camera RAW and no black bar is shown there. Windows 8 Photo Viewer doesn't show the black bar in the NEF either when opened.

Don't know why Portrait mode shots do it in Qimage, but landscape shots don't?

Mack

It took me a while this morning to locate and download 800E portrait images from the internet in Raw...
I got some, and they do exactly what you describe...
As far as I know, Mr. Coffin from DCRAW didn't fix the 800E or that Sony RX 100 properly.  Mike attempted to fix it, and I don't think he had a portrait sample to work with either.
So, I will send him what I downloaded later on today when normal people wake up.
I am positive once he has a portrait oriented sample, he can tackle it.  
Hang in there Mack!

Fred

Glad to see this update, and the HDR function is really fun! By the way, I don't get any black bars with portrait oriented RAW shots from my RX100.

-Liz

Hi Liz,
The black bar issue was with the NIKON D800E.
The RX 100 issue is the White Balance not being addressed except if the camera is in auto WB. Then it is OK

Fred

Hi Fred--I was confused about the AWB/RAW issue because I thought that white balance was a .jpg setting, and that in RAW the white balance is set in the "developing." Apparently I was wrong! So I will leave my camera at AWB.

I didn't know if Mike wanted confirmation that there are no black bars with the RX100, or if he knew it was not an issue, so I added my two cents.  :'(

Liz

This only affects RAW images. When Qimage opens them from your camera, it needs to gather information from the image to adjust the WB.  Your images are fine. You can adjust them in REFINE like any other rae image. Only the initial WB is adversely affected if the camera was set to some setting like , "INDOOR, or FLORESCENT, or Custom... like that.
Otherwise, all OK. 


It's best, if you have a choice, to do WB in the Raw refine screen.

Suppose that my feet smell.  It would work better if I took off my shoes and socks and washed my feet in RAW mode than wait for later and put deodorant powder in my shoes instead.

Fred    ??? :o ;D ;)

Liz

"I was confused about the AWB/RAW issue because I thought that white balance was a .jpg setting, and that in RAW the white balance is set in the "developing." Apparently I was wrong! So I will leave my camera at AWB. "

Me as well. I have always thought that a RAW contained no White Balance info and that the camera was simply applying any variation to a .jpg if you produced one. There is another nearby thread where Terry writes about WB and it encouraged me to make a test yesterday. Five different WB settings produced five different looking images when RAWs were viewed in QU and BreezeBrowser. Fred is saying that QU reads the camera WB setting and applies it to the RAW conversion - so get it wrong in the camera and the error is carried across by QU

Like you I am setting my camera to Auto WB - for ever...

Following Terry's advice in that thread, if I have a shoot in fairly constant light I pick the WB in Raw Refine and copy it to all the other RAW's. Sometime I warm up the shots a bit using the WB slider - but, as Terry says, the way to get the best colours and contrast is to get a correct WB as the start point.

Tony

No Tony I really didn't say that!
What I said was, there's a flaw in the DCRAW converter for the SONY RX 100 images Raw, and due to this flaw, Qimage's decoder will not be able to handle the changes imposed by teh settings of the camera, other than AWB.
That was applicable to the SONY RX 100 Raw... ONLY!
Otherwise, Qimage reads the raw file with the cameras intentions and decodes accordingly.

Fred

Fred,

Seems to be working now here with the D800E.

At first look, I saw the bars and it opened in square.  Did a "Refresh & Rebuild" of the thumbnails and set the RAW to "Default" and all is well now.  Both landscape and portrait open as they should.  Yay!

Thought it was odd that the 106 opened them in squarish mode over 105 which had the bars but didn't display them as squarish.  Oh well, least is appears fixed so Mike can go back to bed.  ;)


Mack

My fault. I should have reminded you to rebuild thumbs to show the change.

I do have a question: just my curiosity, nothing more.
What is your intention with the print?   You are set for 5 x 7 borderless with crop scissors off which fills the top and bottom over the edge, but doesn't fill the sides...
Just curious whether you make that print and then trim the white from the sides?

I have another question. Why would you have a quick launch icon for PS on the task bar when you have Qimage Ultimate?

You can be charged with Indecent Exposure!!!

Fred

A "Refresh & Rebuild" of the thumbnails and set the RAW to "Default" and all is well now


Generally when I crop in PS CS6 I use some Framing Action that sets the borders.  In QI, I usually have the Black as a fill and not the White as shown in the screenshots.  One little niggle I have with QI for generations is that with the black border fill on and if the "Info box" is checked, the info is in black type so it cannot be read.  So I turn it back to white to see that if I check it. Might be nice if QI could figure out that with a dark color, the Info's type would switch to white somehow.
 

Naw. I just leave it Black or let the Framing Action set the outer frame to fill it in.  In the port books I have, the paper in them is black so the black edge isn't an issue.  Some of these frames for 13x19 are 12x18 Digital-sized so they cut it off automatically too.  Frames are still in old school sizes like 8x10, 11x14, 16x20, 20x24 and don't really cover the digital paper sizes well at all, especially A3+ 13 inchers. I hope they figure out soon these new printers are not those archaic paper sizes anymore.


I used the quick launch as the screenshot I posted here was downsized in CS6 to fit the tiny 256K rez. restrictions on the attachments.


Actually, the model could have been in the later sequence not shown in the screenshots.  Seems it got too hot for her (104F that day) and she decided to try something, umm, different in her b-day suit.  It was fun to watch the MUA-stylist on site pass out too.  ;D


Mack

Hi Mack,
You should have asked "generations" ago  ::)
You can change the colour of the Info text in Preferences, see attached screen shot.
Terry

Guess what. Selecting the color and the font and point size for INFO have been in Q a long time...

Click on the Cheater Menu; item 10


You realize I was joking with you, right?

The Indecent Exposure comment was meant for the PS icon on teh taskbar, not that poor girl.
Fred

Well. Well. Color me stoopid.  ::)

I changed the type to Silver so now I am covered for both White and Black background borders.

Thanks!

Oh.  The "poor girl" is more like a "rich woman."  She is near 30 yrs. old and works for $500 per day + expenses (Expenses = Hotel, eats, airfare, etc.).  She was on the road solid for 7 weeks with daily bookings so go figger how poor she is.  I tried to get more info but I got a headache calculating it out.  She speaks Cantonese and travels/models the world.  Lives a block from B&H Photo and pretty well known around there too. Pretty nice to shoot with a "Pro" which makes button pressing a whole lot easier - although modesty was not in her vocabulary either (like I objected!).  Gave the MUA-stylist on site some more 'canvas' to work with too.   :o

Mack

Back to Mike's original post:-
This seems to have been overlooked by everyone due to the dcraw problems  :(
This is a really useful feature, I used it for the first time today when editing a batch of raw photos I took this afternoon. They were medium iso, taken in flat daylight conditions, so extra contrast and saturation was needed. The tool made it possible to see the effect of both adjustments separately and aid getting the best balance for the two settings.
Terry

Terry,

That right click on the yellow filter tool.

Does not work for me.

Can you post a screen shot, please.

Tony

Here it is!!

Fred

Thanks Fred,

My fault. Had not upgraded.

Tony

Tony,
Terry was "spot on" (See he's teaching me proper English)
We got so concerned about the new additional cameras added to the covered camera list, and there being a couple of flaws in it, that we forgot the terrific new feature that Mike tossed in for Xmas.
Usually, the additional cameras which is put out somewhere around three times a year, goes out almost unnoticed, except by the new camera users.

This is a really great feature.... To clear up the mystery (I think like an ordinary person) it affords us the opportunity to see what each filter we may have applied is doing to our image on an individual basis,
If we hold down the green button to the right of the yellow, we get the cumulative effect of all the filters, but the left side yellow button is now selectable.

So for a single example: if I added a White Balance correction and also some contrast and some saturation, I could check each one,,, and decide maybe a  tad less contrast.... I am losing some shadow detail.... etc.  or am I happy with the White Bal. correction that I made.... maybe try again using a different reference point?
Pretty neat...

Enjoy!!
Fred