Color management with Nikon d40x
Locked
 
|
Hello All,
I am new to image editing and raw format so apologize to my lack of knowledge and probably simple questions. I have a Nikon d40x camera and I use linux ubuntu intrepid with dell latitude d630. Recently I decided to take some Raw picture. Once I loaded them in digikam i run into problems with displaying the right colors. I have read many documents about color management but I am still confused. Let me explain my setup. The nikon d40x have three options for color profiles: aRGB in modes Ia and IIIa (first for portraits, second for web) AdobeRGG in mode II (for editing) Default is mode IIIa. This is what I use. I copied(to linux box)icc files from c:\program files\nikon\profiles folder: below is the list of available profiles i copied: root@blwegrzyn-laptop:/home/blwegrzyn/Desktop/Profiles# ls Nk0034a.lns NkCBoost.nlc NKGrayG22.icm NKNTSC.icm Nk0034.lns NKCIE.icm NKLab.icm NKsRGB.icm Nk0080a.lns NKCMatch.icm NKLch2.icm NKWide.icm Nk0080.lns NKCMYK.icm NkLchCal.nla NKYCC.icm NKAdobe.icm NKD1_NEF.icm NkLchCal.nlc NKApple.icm NKDBase_NEF.icm NKMonitor_Mac.icm NKBruce.icm NKGrayG18.icm NKMonitor_Win.icm Now have to set digikam: for the workspace profile I set SRGB for the the input profile I have only 4 options although there is more profiles in above folder. I am not sure why only four are displayed: Nikon D1 for NEF v1.0.0.3002 Nikon DBase for NEF v3.0.0.3001 Nikon Lab Profile v4.0.0.3001 Nikon YCbCr 4.0.0.3005 and here is when my problem starts , which one should I choose??? The all give me same output, so I picked the Nikon DBase for NEF v3.0.0.3001 profile. For the raw decoding settings I left default settings. Then I picked one of the raw pictures and click edit and applied the icc profiles. The picture looks like it would have less colors and its kind of yellowish and green. I have read that this can happen with using the icc profiles , but it does not look or feel correct. Next , I saved the changes and I ended up with png picture that looked much worse the the one displayed on the laptop screen. You can see the results here: http://lexoncom.com/temp/digikam/ Am I setting everything correctly? Is above correct? Which Nikon profile should I apply? thx Bart _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
I was able to find out that I should use:
Nikon DBase for NEF v3.0.0.3001 profile, But, I still dont understand why images are different in preview and after raw conversion is applied, in original nikon software (with profiles applied) images look exactly like in preview in digicam, anyone? > Hello All, > > I am new to image editing and raw format so apologize to my lack of > knowledge and probably simple questions. I have a Nikon d40x camera and I > use linux ubuntu intrepid with dell latitude d630. Recently I decided to > take some Raw picture. Once I loaded them in digikam i run into problems > with displaying the right colors. I have read many documents about color > management but I am still confused. Let me explain my setup. > The nikon d40x have three options for color profiles: > aRGB in modes Ia and IIIa (first for portraits, second for web) > AdobeRGG in mode II (for editing) > Default is mode IIIa. This is what I use. > I copied(to linux box)icc files from c:\program files\nikon\profiles > folder: > below is the list of available profiles i copied: > > root@blwegrzyn-laptop:/home/blwegrzyn/Desktop/Profiles# ls > Nk0034a.lns NkCBoost.nlc NKGrayG22.icm NKNTSC.icm > Nk0034.lns NKCIE.icm NKLab.icm NKsRGB.icm > Nk0080a.lns NKCMatch.icm NKLch2.icm NKWide.icm > Nk0080.lns NKCMYK.icm NkLchCal.nla NKYCC.icm > NKAdobe.icm NKD1_NEF.icm NkLchCal.nlc > NKApple.icm NKDBase_NEF.icm NKMonitor_Mac.icm > NKBruce.icm NKGrayG18.icm NKMonitor_Win.icm > > Now have to set digikam: > > for the workspace profile I set SRGB > for the the input profile I have only 4 options although there is more > profiles in above folder. I am not sure why only four are displayed: > Nikon D1 for NEF v1.0.0.3002 > Nikon DBase for NEF v3.0.0.3001 > Nikon Lab Profile v4.0.0.3001 > Nikon YCbCr 4.0.0.3005 > > and here is when my problem starts , which one should I choose??? > The all give me same output, so I picked the Nikon DBase for NEF > v3.0.0.3001 profile. > For the raw decoding settings I left default settings. > > Then I picked one of the raw pictures and click edit and applied the icc > profiles. > The picture looks like it would have less colors and its kind of yellowish > and green. > I have read that this can happen with using the icc profiles , but it does > not look or feel correct. > > Next , I saved the changes and I ended up with png picture that looked > much worse the the one displayed on the laptop screen. You can see the > results here: > http://lexoncom.com/temp/digikam/ > > Am I setting everything correctly? > Is above correct? > Which Nikon profile should I apply? > > > thx > > Bart > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
Op Friday 12 December 2008, schreef [hidden email]:
> I was able to find out that I should use: > Nikon DBase for NEF v3.0.0.3001 > > profile, > > But, I still dont understand why images are different in preview and after > raw conversion is applied, As far as I know every raw converter is slightly different. If you can't get the results you want from a certain piece of software, you can always try another! If you are getting grossly different (unacceptable) results you might need to dive into the software manual. Maybe theres some tweak you are missing? Dennis > > in original nikon software (with profiles applied) images look exactly > like in preview in digicam, > > anyone? > > > Hello All, > > > > I am new to image editing and raw format so apologize to my lack of > > knowledge and probably simple questions. I have a Nikon d40x camera and > > I use linux ubuntu intrepid with dell latitude d630. Recently I decided > > to take some Raw picture. Once I loaded them in digikam i run into > > problems with displaying the right colors. I have read many documents > > about color management but I am still confused. Let me explain my setup. > > The nikon d40x have three options for color profiles: > > aRGB in modes Ia and IIIa (first for portraits, second for web) > > AdobeRGG in mode II (for editing) > > Default is mode IIIa. This is what I use. > > I copied(to linux box)icc files from c:\program files\nikon\profiles > > folder: > > below is the list of available profiles i copied: > > > > root@blwegrzyn-laptop:/home/blwegrzyn/Desktop/Profiles# ls > > Nk0034a.lns NkCBoost.nlc NKGrayG22.icm NKNTSC.icm > > Nk0034.lns NKCIE.icm NKLab.icm NKsRGB.icm > > Nk0080a.lns NKCMatch.icm NKLch2.icm NKWide.icm > > Nk0080.lns NKCMYK.icm NkLchCal.nla NKYCC.icm > > NKAdobe.icm NKD1_NEF.icm NkLchCal.nlc > > NKApple.icm NKDBase_NEF.icm NKMonitor_Mac.icm > > NKBruce.icm NKGrayG18.icm NKMonitor_Win.icm > > > > Now have to set digikam: > > > > for the workspace profile I set SRGB > > for the the input profile I have only 4 options although there is more > > profiles in above folder. I am not sure why only four are displayed: > > Nikon D1 for NEF v1.0.0.3002 > > Nikon DBase for NEF v3.0.0.3001 > > Nikon Lab Profile v4.0.0.3001 > > Nikon YCbCr 4.0.0.3005 > > > > and here is when my problem starts , which one should I choose??? > > The all give me same output, so I picked the Nikon DBase for NEF > > v3.0.0.3001 profile. > > For the raw decoding settings I left default settings. > > > > Then I picked one of the raw pictures and click edit and applied the icc > > profiles. > > The picture looks like it would have less colors and its kind of > > yellowish and green. > > I have read that this can happen with using the icc profiles , but it > > does not look or feel correct. > > > > Next , I saved the changes and I ended up with png picture that looked > > much worse the the one displayed on the laptop screen. You can see the > > results here: > > http://lexoncom.com/temp/digikam/ > > > > Am I setting everything correctly? > > Is above correct? > > Which Nikon profile should I apply? > > > > > > thx > > > > Bart > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Digikam-users mailing list > > [hidden email] > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
In reply to this post by junk-23
Following message from Elle Stone via Gerard Kulzer
dated Tue, 13 May 2008 08:23:24 +0200 seems to respond to your questions. Those thumbnails/lowresJPG's are made in the camera using closed proprietary algorythms. Cheers Sveinn í Felli [hidden email] wrote: > I was able to find out that I should use: > Nikon DBase for NEF v3.0.0.3001 > > profile, > > But, I still dont understand why images are different in preview and after > raw conversion is applied, > > in original nikon software (with profiles applied) images look exactly > like in preview in digicam, > > anyone? > On Monday 12 May 2008 elle stone wrote: > > Gerhard Kulzer-3 wrote: > > > > > > This holds true, and if you have a recent libkdcraw the D60 is supported. > > I always work with digiKam for reviewing the raw image quality, no need to > > extract thumbnails by another application, digiKam does it. > > > > > Hi Lawrence and Gerhard, > > Does digikam extract the jpeg as a separate file, or display it as a > substitute for the decoded raw file, or both? I extract the embedded jpeg > as a separate file (from the command line - it's just easier for my > particular workflow) and use it for storing metadata and also for quick > reviews regarding sharpness, etc, as Gerhard suggests. The Canon 400d > embedded jpegs are around 700kb, more than big enough for emailing to > friends, so useful to have as separate files. digiKam extracts the embedded thumbnail in the RAW image on the fly, not as a separate file (but a separate file can be easily created with: dcraw -e .*CR2 for example). Gerhard _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
2008/12/13 "Sveinn í Felli (IMAP)" <[hidden email]> Following message from Elle Stone via Gerard Kulzer the image used to render _quickly_ thumbnails in digiKam is a small jpeg image embeded in RAW and taken by camera during shot. It's not a full image resolution version, it's a reduced one generally used to render preview in TV or camera screen. This JPEG image use all camera algorithms to render properlly color/gamma. It's not the RAW image. In fact it have the same render than if you take a real JPEG image instead a RAW. But you cannot compare RAW image data and JPEG image data : RAW do not have color space, JPEG is always in RGB color space. Gilles Caulier _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
this explains everything, I thought that those thumnails were small.
But , i tried to extrat one and it was 903K. Big enough to look very good. One more think, I am curious if Nikon software also displays JPEG as preview while editing or those are Raw images converted to working color space and then updated while editing? Now I understand algorithms used by nikon raw converter and digikam may differ and the final output will depend on how the users uses the editing software editing features. Initially I though that every software uses same raw conversion and the image would only differ depending on how it was altered during the editing. It also looks like that it is better to use original raw converters. thx > 2008/12/13 "Sveinn í Felli (IMAP)" <[hidden email]> > >> Following message from Elle Stone via Gerard Kulzer >> dated Tue, 13 May 2008 08:23:24 +0200 >> seems to respond to your questions. >> Those thumbnails/lowresJPG's are made in the camera using >> closed proprietary algorythms. >> Cheers >> >> Sveinn í Felli > > > the image used to render _quickly_ thumbnails in digiKam is a small jpeg > image embeded in RAW and taken by camera during shot. It's not a full > image > resolution version, it's a reduced one generally used to render preview in > TV or camera screen. > > This JPEG image use all camera algorithms to render properlly color/gamma. > It's not the RAW image. In fact it have the same render than if you take a > real JPEG image instead a RAW. > > But you cannot compare RAW image data and JPEG image data : RAW do not > have > color space, JPEG is always in RGB color space. > > Gilles Caulier > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 11:56 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote:
> this explains everything, I thought that those thumnails were small. > But , i tried to extrat one and it was 903K. Big enough to look very good. > One more think, I am curious if Nikon software also displays JPEG as > preview while editing or those are Raw images converted to working color > space and then updated while editing? > Now I understand algorithms used by nikon raw converter and digikam may > differ and the final output will depend on how the users uses the editing > software editing features. Initially I though that every software uses > same raw conversion and the image would only differ depending on how it > was altered during the editing. It also looks like that it is better to > use original raw converters. If "original" means "from the camera manufacturer", I think it's not necessarily so. For example, there are different methods to map the camera pixels to an image element (demosaicing) and none of the methods can be said to be correct. They all have compromises, but each has its own set of compromises. For most applications, for most images, for most people, the differences don't matter at all. One thing that has bitten me when trying a new raw converter is that some of them automatically apply some exposure touch up. I'd prefer that they didn't. > > thx > >> 2008/12/13 "Sveinn í Felli (IMAP)" <[hidden email]> >> >>> Following message from Elle Stone via Gerard Kulzer >>> dated Tue, 13 May 2008 08:23:24 +0200 >>> seems to respond to your questions. >>> Those thumbnails/lowresJPG's are made in the camera using >>> closed proprietary algorythms. >>> Cheers >>> >>> Sveinn í Felli >> >> >> the image used to render _quickly_ thumbnails in digiKam is a small jpeg >> image embeded in RAW and taken by camera during shot. It's not a full >> image >> resolution version, it's a reduced one generally used to render preview in >> TV or camera screen. >> >> This JPEG image use all camera algorithms to render properlly color/gamma. >> It's not the RAW image. In fact it have the same render than if you take a >> real JPEG image instead a RAW. >> >> But you cannot compare RAW image data and JPEG image data : RAW do not >> have >> color space, JPEG is always in RGB color space. >> >> Gilles Caulier >> _______________________________________________ >> Digikam-users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users >> > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
This is what I feel too.
It looks like Nikon software tweaks the image by deafult and we dont have control over it (during raw conversion). Digicam does not do anything and I would say in some sense this is more professional aproach. thx > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 11:56 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote: >> this explains everything, I thought that those thumnails were small. >> But , i tried to extrat one and it was 903K. Big enough to look very >> good. >> One more think, I am curious if Nikon software also displays JPEG as >> preview while editing or those are Raw images converted to working color >> space and then updated while editing? >> Now I understand algorithms used by nikon raw converter and digikam may >> differ and the final output will depend on how the users uses the >> editing >> software editing features. Initially I though that every software uses >> same raw conversion and the image would only differ depending on how it >> was altered during the editing. It also looks like that it is better to >> use original raw converters. > > If "original" means "from the camera manufacturer", I think it's not > necessarily so. For example, there are different methods to map the > camera pixels to an image element (demosaicing) and none of the > methods can be said to be correct. They all have compromises, but > each has its own set of compromises. For most applications, for most > images, for most people, the differences don't matter at all. One > thing that has bitten me when trying a new raw converter is that some > of them automatically apply some exposure touch up. I'd prefer that > they didn't. > > >> >> thx >> >>> 2008/12/13 "Sveinn í Felli (IMAP)" <[hidden email]> >>> >>>> Following message from Elle Stone via Gerard Kulzer >>>> dated Tue, 13 May 2008 08:23:24 +0200 >>>> seems to respond to your questions. >>>> Those thumbnails/lowresJPG's are made in the camera using >>>> closed proprietary algorythms. >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Sveinn í Felli >>> >>> >>> the image used to render _quickly_ thumbnails in digiKam is a small >>> jpeg >>> image embeded in RAW and taken by camera during shot. It's not a full >>> image >>> resolution version, it's a reduced one generally used to render preview >>> in >>> TV or camera screen. >>> >>> This JPEG image use all camera algorithms to render properlly >>> color/gamma. >>> It's not the RAW image. In fact it have the same render than if you >>> take a >>> real JPEG image instead a RAW. >>> >>> But you cannot compare RAW image data and JPEG image data : RAW do not >>> have >>> color space, JPEG is always in RGB color space. >>> >>> Gilles Caulier >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Digikam-users mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Digikam-users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users >> > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
On Samstag, 13. Dezember 2008, [hidden email] wrote:
> This is what I feel too. > It looks like Nikon software tweaks the image by deafult and we > dont have control over it (during raw conversion). Digicam does > not do anything and I would say in some sense this is more > professional aproach. The Nikon software applies the settings you did in the camera. I _do_ consider this a professional approach. But you can still change this behaviour in you application. Heiner -- heiner at heiner-lamprecht dot net GnuPG - Key: 9859E373 Fingerprint: 3770 7947 F917 94EF 8717 BADB 0139 7554 9859 E373 _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
If that is the case then, is it possible to configure Digikam to applt the
same settings as Nikon Software? > On Samstag, 13. Dezember 2008, [hidden email] wrote: >> This is what I feel too. >> It looks like Nikon software tweaks the image by deafult and we >> dont have control over it (during raw conversion). Digicam does >> not do anything and I would say in some sense this is more >> professional aproach. > > The Nikon software applies the settings you did in the camera. I > _do_ consider this a professional approach. But you can still > change this behaviour in you application. > > > Heiner > > -- > heiner at heiner-lamprecht dot net GnuPG - Key: 9859E373 > Fingerprint: 3770 7947 F917 94EF 8717 BADB 0139 7554 9859 E373 > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
On Samstag, 13. Dezember 2008, [hidden email] wrote:
> If that is the case then, is it possible to configure Digikam to > applt the same settings as Nikon Software? I fear, it's not possible. Even commercial applications like Photoshop or Lightroom are not able to do so. It is possible, that Nikon does not give any information about how these settings are stored in the raw file. But maybe some of the raw-converter developers have more insight in this topic. Heiner > > On Samstag, 13. Dezember 2008, [hidden email] wrote: > >> This is what I feel too. > >> It looks like Nikon software tweaks the image by deafult and > >> we dont have control over it (during raw conversion). Digicam > >> does not do anything and I would say in some sense this is > >> more professional aproach. > > > > The Nikon software applies the settings you did in the camera. > > I _do_ consider this a professional approach. But you can > > still change this behaviour in you application. > > > > > > Heiner > > > > -- > > heiner at heiner-lamprecht dot net GnuPG - Key: 9859E373 > > Fingerprint: 3770 7947 F917 94EF 8717 BADB 0139 7554 9859 > > E373 _______________________________________________ > > Digikam-users mailing list > > [hidden email] > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users -- heiner at heiner-lamprecht dot net GnuPG - Key: 9859E373 Fingerprint: 3770 7947 F917 94EF 8717 BADB 0139 7554 9859 E373 _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
2008/12/13 Heiner Lamprecht <[hidden email]>
yes, private information are stored in Makernote metadata (a part of Exif where manufacturers can store unstandardized and proprietary informations about camera settings) There is no public informations about. The only way to know what's stored here is to process reverse engineering. Exiv2 know already some parts, as Exiftool. dcraw program also analyze Makernote to optimize Raw decoding. but it's limited. digiKam now use LibRaw to decode Raw files. The current implementation is based on dcraw but later some works will be done to review code and improve Makenotes analyze to give a better and faster job. But it's for the future of course. Gilles Caulier
_______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
In reply to this post by junk-23
Op Saturday 13 December 2008, schreef [hidden email]:
> It also looks like that it is better to > use original raw converters. I don't think so. I always use UFRaw and absolutely love it. I get professional results when I'm not just d1cking around with it! (I admit it took a while to get the results I wanted at first) It doesn't apply mystery tweaks for me or try to "help" me in any way I don't want. I can use it from the command line (script) and store all sorts of useful conversion profiles. _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
hmm, I tried UFRaw too and Nikon soft had better resuls.
> Op Saturday 13 December 2008, schreef [hidden email]: >> It also looks like that it is better to >> use original raw converters. > > I don't think so. I always use UFRaw and absolutely love it. I get > professional results when I'm not just d1cking around with it! (I admit it > took a while to get the results I wanted at first) It doesn't apply > mystery > tweaks for me or try to "help" me in any way I don't want. I can use it > from > the command line (script) and store all sorts of useful conversion > profiles. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
Op Saturday 13 December 2008, schreef [hidden email]:
> hmm, I tried UFRaw too and Nikon soft had better resuls. I haven't tried it myself, but it seems a lot of professionals are using "Bibble". They have a Linux version too, and it consistently gets good reviews. Dennis _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Color management with Nikon d40x
|
|
In reply to this post by junk-23
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 1:03 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote:
> This is what I feel too. > It looks like Nikon software tweaks the image by deafult and we dont have > control over it (during raw conversion). Digicam does not do anything and > I would say in some sense this is more professional aproach. Is that right? Doesn't digiKam reset (at least) the black point and white point? On my installation, the sliders in the "levels" menu come up non-zero (and non-full-scale) by default. I suppose there must be some way to control the default behavior ... but I'm new at digiKam, and am still learning my way around. -gary > > thx > > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 11:56 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> this explains everything, I thought that those thumnails were small. >>> But , i tried to extrat one and it was 903K. Big enough to look very >>> good. >>> One more think, I am curious if Nikon software also displays JPEG as >>> preview while editing or those are Raw images converted to working color >>> space and then updated while editing? >>> Now I understand algorithms used by nikon raw converter and digikam may >>> differ and the final output will depend on how the users uses the >>> editing >>> software editing features. Initially I though that every software uses >>> same raw conversion and the image would only differ depending on how it >>> was altered during the editing. It also looks like that it is better to >>> use original raw converters. >> >> If "original" means "from the camera manufacturer", I think it's not >> necessarily so. For example, there are different methods to map the >> camera pixels to an image element (demosaicing) and none of the >> methods can be said to be correct. They all have compromises, but >> each has its own set of compromises. For most applications, for most >> images, for most people, the differences don't matter at all. One >> thing that has bitten me when trying a new raw converter is that some >> of them automatically apply some exposure touch up. I'd prefer that >> they didn't. >> >> >>> >>> thx >>> >>>> 2008/12/13 "Sveinn í Felli (IMAP)" <[hidden email]> >>>> >>>>> Following message from Elle Stone via Gerard Kulzer >>>>> dated Tue, 13 May 2008 08:23:24 +0200 >>>>> seems to respond to your questions. >>>>> Those thumbnails/lowresJPG's are made in the camera using >>>>> closed proprietary algorythms. >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> Sveinn í Felli >>>> >>>> >>>> the image used to render _quickly_ thumbnails in digiKam is a small >>>> jpeg >>>> image embeded in RAW and taken by camera during shot. It's not a full >>>> image >>>> resolution version, it's a reduced one generally used to render preview >>>> in >>>> TV or camera screen. >>>> >>>> This JPEG image use all camera algorithms to render properlly >>>> color/gamma. >>>> It's not the RAW image. In fact it have the same render than if you >>>> take a >>>> real JPEG image instead a RAW. >>>> >>>> But you cannot compare RAW image data and JPEG image data : RAW do not >>>> have >>>> color space, JPEG is always in RGB color space. >>>> >>>> Gilles Caulier >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Digikam-users mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Digikam-users mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Digikam-users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users >> > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
«
Return to digikam-users
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |