How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
Locked
How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
 
|
This is a follow up to my "How does digiKam do raw conversions for the
slide shows ?" post from earlier today. So... I shot 600 raws at a wedding last weekend. In digiKam the previews of these files look awesome. Apparently they come from a jpg embedded in the raw file. I need to convert the raws to jpegs. I also have another 2,000 or so raws to convert. The problem with converting raws to jpegs automatically is that they almost never look as good as the preview images. Please don't tell me to shoot jpgs alone because when I spend a lot of time on an image I can get it looking a lot better than than the preview image, especially if the white balance is out and I happened to shoot a grey card image from which to adjust the white balance. This happens frequently when I shoot in mixed lighting situations, which happens from time to time. If I were a lazy man I would just extract the jpgs from the raw files. But that seems like a waste given that we have all these fancy raw converters and all the glorious raw pixel data sitting in the raw file. I've used a number of tools (ufraw, Raw Studio and the digiKam tools) and they usually come out looking pretty horid. I can't figure out why. The white balance is usually way out, the saturation usually needs adjustment and sometimes even the exposure is off. I can fix all this stuff, but it takes a lot of TIME. I'm looking for something that doesn't take a lot of hand tweaking. This raw conversion issue is a big problem for me. Its the main bottleneck in my whole photography workflow, now that I have digiKam anyway. Before everything was a bottleneck. Now only raw conversion is. digiKam rocks ! FWIW, I have raw images from a D50, 40D and 450D. So how do you convert your raws to jpgs automatically and get a good result, ie something close to the preview jpg ? I would prefer to use the tools in digiKam but will consider using outside tools and eventually write a plugin to use them in digiKam. Thanks _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
I think part of the problem is your are doing it en masse. Sometimes that is fine and you tweak the settings for 1 shot and it will be the same for all of them. But a lot of the time what worked for one picture does not work for another. So I do not think there is a magic bullet for all your raws, other than ripping the jpg from the RAW file in bulk, then the ones your really like go back and work on the raw file.
You have 2 canon cameras. The DPP application in windows does a great job of making jpg's from the raw files. Unfortunately I have not been able to get DPP to work in Linux (at least the upgrading to a current version part) ----- Original Message ---- > From: Linuxguy123 <[hidden email]> > To: [hidden email] > Sent: Wed, December 23, 2009 2:13:27 PM > Subject: [Digikam-users] How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ? > > This is a follow up to my "How does digiKam do raw conversions for the > slide shows ?" post from earlier today. > > So... I shot 600 raws at a wedding last weekend. In digiKam the > previews of these files look awesome. Apparently they come from a jpg > embedded in the raw file. > > I need to convert the raws to jpegs. I also have another 2,000 or so > raws to convert. > > The problem with converting raws to jpegs automatically is that they > almost never look as good as the preview images. Please don't tell me > to shoot jpgs alone because when I spend a lot of time on an image I can > get it looking a lot better than than the preview image, especially if > the white balance is out and I happened to shoot a grey card image from > which to adjust the white balance. This happens frequently when I shoot > in mixed lighting situations, which happens from time to time. > > If I were a lazy man I would just extract the jpgs from the raw files. > But that seems like a waste given that we have all these fancy raw > converters and all the glorious raw pixel data sitting in the raw file. > > I've used a number of tools (ufraw, Raw Studio and the digiKam tools) > and they usually come out looking pretty horid. I can't figure out why. > The white balance is usually way out, the saturation usually needs > adjustment and sometimes even the exposure is off. I can fix all this > stuff, but it takes a lot of TIME. I'm looking for something that > doesn't take a lot of hand tweaking. > > This raw conversion issue is a big problem for me. Its the main > bottleneck in my whole photography workflow, now that I have digiKam > anyway. Before everything was a bottleneck. Now only raw conversion > is. digiKam rocks ! > > FWIW, I have raw images from a D50, 40D and 450D. > > So how do you convert your raws to jpgs automatically and get a good > result, ie something close to the preview jpg ? I would prefer to use > the tools in digiKam but will consider using outside tools and > eventually write a plugin to use them in digiKam. > > > Thanks > > _______________________________________________ > 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: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In digiKam 1.0.0, use Batch Queue Manager. Set a queue with RAW files
and, set Tool to convert to JPEG, and take a coffee. In this case, RAW will be converted in 8 bits color depth using auto gamma adjustement. Result are not too bad. At least you can try... The RAW decoding settings used is set on digiKam setup panel. With digiKam 0.10.0, there is no BQM. Use RAW Batch Converter kipi-plugins... It do the same. Gilles Caulier 2009/12/23 Adam <[hidden email]>: > I think part of the problem is your are doing it en masse. Sometimes that is fine and you tweak the settings for 1 shot and it will be the same for all of them. But a lot of the time what worked for one picture does not work for another. So I do not think there is a magic bullet for all your raws, other than ripping the jpg from the RAW file in bulk, then the ones your really like go back and work on the raw file. > > You have 2 canon cameras. The DPP application in windows does a great job of making jpg's from the raw files. Unfortunately I have not been able to get DPP to work in Linux (at least the upgrading to a current version part) > > > > ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Linuxguy123 <[hidden email]> >> To: [hidden email] >> Sent: Wed, December 23, 2009 2:13:27 PM >> Subject: [Digikam-users] How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ? >> >> This is a follow up to my "How does digiKam do raw conversions for the >> slide shows ?" post from earlier today. >> >> So... I shot 600 raws at a wedding last weekend. In digiKam the >> previews of these files look awesome. Apparently they come from a jpg >> embedded in the raw file. >> >> I need to convert the raws to jpegs. I also have another 2,000 or so >> raws to convert. >> >> The problem with converting raws to jpegs automatically is that they >> almost never look as good as the preview images. Please don't tell me >> to shoot jpgs alone because when I spend a lot of time on an image I can >> get it looking a lot better than than the preview image, especially if >> the white balance is out and I happened to shoot a grey card image from >> which to adjust the white balance. This happens frequently when I shoot >> in mixed lighting situations, which happens from time to time. >> >> If I were a lazy man I would just extract the jpgs from the raw files. >> But that seems like a waste given that we have all these fancy raw >> converters and all the glorious raw pixel data sitting in the raw file. >> >> I've used a number of tools (ufraw, Raw Studio and the digiKam tools) >> and they usually come out looking pretty horid. I can't figure out why. >> The white balance is usually way out, the saturation usually needs >> adjustment and sometimes even the exposure is off. I can fix all this >> stuff, but it takes a lot of TIME. I'm looking for something that >> doesn't take a lot of hand tweaking. >> >> This raw conversion issue is a big problem for me. Its the main >> bottleneck in my whole photography workflow, now that I have digiKam >> anyway. Before everything was a bottleneck. Now only raw conversion >> is. digiKam rocks ! >> >> FWIW, I have raw images from a D50, 40D and 450D. >> >> So how do you convert your raws to jpgs automatically and get a good >> result, ie something close to the preview jpg ? I would prefer to use >> the tools in digiKam but will consider using outside tools and >> eventually write a plugin to use them in digiKam. >> >> >> Thanks >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Linuxguy123
Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123:
> This is a follow up to my "How does digiKam do raw conversions for > the slide shows ?" post from earlier today. > > So... I shot 600 raws at a wedding last weekend. In digiKam the > previews of these files look awesome. Apparently they come from a > jpg embedded in the raw file. > > I need to convert the raws to jpegs. I also have another 2,000 or > so raws to convert. > > The problem with converting raws to jpegs automatically is that > they almost never look as good as the preview images. Please > don't tell me to shoot jpgs alone because when I spend a lot of > time on an image I can get it looking a lot better than than the > preview image, especially if the white balance is out and I > happened to shoot a grey card image from which to adjust the white > balance. This happens frequently when I shoot in mixed lighting > situations, which happens from time to time. > > If I were a lazy man I would just extract the jpgs from the raw > files. But that seems like a waste given that we have all these > fancy raw converters and all the glorious raw pixel data sitting > in the raw file. > > I've used a number of tools (ufraw, Raw Studio and the digiKam > tools) and they usually come out looking pretty horid. I can't > figure out why. The white balance is usually way out, the > saturation usually needs adjustment and sometimes even the > exposure is off. I can fix all this stuff, but it takes a lot of > TIME. I'm looking for something that doesn't take a lot of hand > tweaking. > > This raw conversion issue is a big problem for me. Its the main > bottleneck in my whole photography workflow, now that I have > digiKam anyway. Before everything was a bottleneck. Now only raw > conversion is. digiKam rocks ! > > FWIW, I have raw images from a D50, 40D and 450D. > > So how do you convert your raws to jpgs automatically and get a > good result, ie something close to the preview jpg ? I would > prefer to use the tools in digiKam but will consider using outside > tools and eventually write a plugin to use them in digiKam. I usually use UFRaw to set exposure, white balance etc. and safe it as ID file only (ID file contains settings only and is much faster to save than a jpeg or png). After that is done, I run ufraw-batch with the ID files (which can take very long). I have created a curve which matches (almost) the EOS30D one. I use the EOS standard icc profile with gamma set to 0.45 and linearity to 0.1. Additionally I set saturation to 1.1 and enabled auto black-point adjustment. Most raw files looks pretty good with this settings. If many pictures can be developed the same way, you can use one ID file for many raw pictures. But I take the extra time to set some values for every picture. My results mostly looks better than the embedded jpegs. Color is a little less intensive but I think more accurate. Martin > > > Thanks > _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 20:56 +0100, Martin (KDE) wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123: > > > > So how do you convert your raws to jpgs automatically and get a > > good result, ie something close to the preview jpg ? I would > > prefer to use the tools in digiKam but will consider using outside > > tools and eventually write a plugin to use them in digiKam. > > I usually use UFRaw to set exposure, white balance etc. and safe it as > ID file only (ID file contains settings only and is much faster to > save than a jpeg or png). After that is done, I run ufraw-batch with > the ID files (which can take very long). That is what I used to do and what gives me the best result. As long as the shooting situation doesn't change much the same ID file will give a good result across a large number of images. As far as I know, ufraw is the only converter that allows one to do this sort of thing. Did you know that one can extract the icc file from the raw file using Exiftool ? http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/ > I have created a curve which matches (almost) the EOS30D one. I use > the EOS standard icc profile with gamma set to 0.45 and linearity to > 0.1. Additionally I set saturation to 1.1 and enabled auto black-point > adjustment. Very interesting. > Most raw files looks pretty good with this settings. If many pictures > can be developed the same way, you can use one ID file for many raw > pictures. But I take the extra time to set some values for every > picture. Right. But shouldn't the raw file theoretically have all the information that a raw converter needs to do a really good job of converting the image, at least to something that matches the embedded jpg ? > My results mostly looks better than the embedded jpegs. Color is a > little less intensive but I think more accurate. OK. _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Adam-268
On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 11:25 -0800, Adam wrote:
> I think part of the problem is your are doing it en masse. Sometimes that is fine and you tweak the settings for 1 shot and it will be the same for all of them. But a lot of the time what worked for one picture does not work for another. So I do not think there is a magic bullet for all your raws, other than ripping the jpg from the RAW file in bulk, then the ones your really like go back and work on the raw file. > > You have 2 canon cameras. The DPP application in windows does a great > job of making jpg's from the raw files. Unfortunately I have not been > able to get DPP to work in Linux (at least the upgrading to a current > version part) Why does DPP work better than the tools we are using ? I'm guessing that DPP uses other/more information available in the raw file. _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Gilles Caulier-4
On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 20:34 +0100, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> In digiKam 1.0.0, use Batch Queue Manager. Set a queue with RAW files > and, set Tool to convert to JPEG, and take a coffee. > > In this case, RAW will be converted in 8 bits color depth using auto > gamma adjustement. Result are not too bad. At least you can try... The > RAW decoding settings used is set on digiKam setup panel. > > With digiKam 0.10.0, there is no BQM. Use RAW Batch Converter > kipi-plugins... It do the same. I understand the workflow, thanks. The problem is the quality. The workflow is excellent. If the results were high quality, digiKam would be totally unbeatable. Raw conversion quality is its weakness and ironically, its what I need most. _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Linuxguy123
Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123:
> On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 20:56 +0100, Martin (KDE) wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123: > > > So how do you convert your raws to jpgs automatically and get a > > > good result, ie something close to the preview jpg ? I would > > > prefer to use the tools in digiKam but will consider using > > > outside tools and eventually write a plugin to use them in > > > digiKam. > > > > I usually use UFRaw to set exposure, white balance etc. and safe > > it as ID file only (ID file contains settings only and is much > > faster to save than a jpeg or png). After that is done, I run > > ufraw-batch with the ID files (which can take very long). > > That is what I used to do and what gives me the best result. As > long as the shooting situation doesn't change much the same ID > file will give a good result across a large number of images. > > As far as I know, ufraw is the only converter that allows one to do > this sort of thing. > > Did you know that one can extract the icc file from the raw file > using Exiftool ? http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/ I heard something about that, but I didn't get it working. > > > I have created a curve which matches (almost) the EOS30D one. I > > use the EOS standard icc profile with gamma set to 0.45 and > > linearity to 0.1. Additionally I set saturation to 1.1 and > > enabled auto black-point adjustment. > > Very interesting. > > > Most raw files looks pretty good with this settings. If many > > pictures can be developed the same way, you can use one ID file > > for many raw pictures. But I take the extra time to set some > > values for every picture. > > Right. But shouldn't the raw file theoretically have all the > information that a raw converter needs to do a really good job of > converting the image, at least to something that matches the > embedded jpg ? In theory yes, but most manufacturers hides essential settings in their software (camera and PC). So if you use alternative software you have to do it of your own step by step. > > > My results mostly looks better than the embedded jpegs. Color is > > a little less intensive but I think more accurate. > > OK. > Martin _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Linuxguy123
Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123:
> On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 11:25 -0800, Adam wrote: > > I think part of the problem is your are doing it en masse. > > Sometimes that is fine and you tweak the settings for 1 shot and > > it will be the same for all of them. But a lot of the time what > > worked for one picture does not work for another. So I do not > > think there is a magic bullet for all your raws, other than > > ripping the jpg from the RAW file in bulk, then the ones your > > really like go back and work on the raw file. > > > > You have 2 canon cameras. The DPP application in windows does a > > great job of making jpg's from the raw files. Unfortunately I > > have not been able to get DPP to work in Linux (at least the > > upgrading to a current version part) > > Why does DPP work better than the tools we are using ? I'm > guessing that DPP uses other/more information available in the raw > file. That for one and second DPP can correct lens flaws (like chromatic aberrations, distortions etc). What I miss with most raw developers: the ability to store some basic corrections (like rotate and clipping) with a ID file like ufraw does - a kind of recipe. So if I have to do the stuff once again with little changes I change the recipe and rerun the development. RawTherapee has something alike. Martin _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 21:42 +0100, Martin (KDE) wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123: > > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 11:25 -0800, Adam wrote: > > Why does DPP work better than the tools we are using ? I'm > > guessing that DPP uses other/more information available in the raw > > file. > > That for one and second DPP can correct lens flaws (like chromatic > aberrations, distortions etc). > > What I miss with most raw developers: the ability to store some basic > corrections (like rotate and clipping) with a ID file like ufraw does > - a kind of recipe. So if I have to do the stuff once again with > little changes I change the recipe and rerun the development. > RawTherapee has something alike. I agree. I opened a feature request on this topic last fall. https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=209000 When I first wrote it I thought digiKam was using ufraw. I was wrong. _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In reply to this post by Martin (KDE)
----- Original Message ---- > From: Martin (KDE) <[hidden email]> > To: [hidden email] > Sent: Wed, December 23, 2009 3:42:31 PM > Subject: Re: [Digikam-users] How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ? > > Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123: > > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 11:25 -0800, Adam wrote: > > > I think part of the problem is your are doing it en masse. > > > Sometimes that is fine and you tweak the settings for 1 shot and > > > it will be the same for all of them. But a lot of the time what > > > worked for one picture does not work for another. So I do not > > > think there is a magic bullet for all your raws, other than > > > ripping the jpg from the RAW file in bulk, then the ones your > > > really like go back and work on the raw file. > > > > > > You have 2 canon cameras. The DPP application in windows does a > > > great job of making jpg's from the raw files. Unfortunately I > > > have not been able to get DPP to work in Linux (at least the > > > upgrading to a current version part) > > > > Why does DPP work better than the tools we are using ? I'm > > guessing that DPP uses other/more information available in the raw > > file. > > That for one and second DPP can correct lens flaws (like chromatic > aberrations, distortions etc). > > What I miss with most raw developers: the ability to store some basic > corrections (like rotate and clipping) with a ID file like ufraw does > - a kind of recipe. So if I have to do the stuff once again with > little changes I change the recipe and rerun the development. > RawTherapee has something alike. > > Martin Martin, that is exactly why I have not sworn off of windows completely yet. Not the recipe file but, something I have not researched alternatives yet, but in DPP you can save the raw file with your changes, so they are there when you open it again, but, if you want, you can revert to the original raw shot and get rid of all your changes and start from scratch. I got the DPP that came with the 40d to install and run but I can not get the latest version to run and I am trying to learn to live with out. I have to try the ID file from UFraw and see if it does what I need. Then I will be off DPP until they come out with a linux version. If Digikam can save the settings done to the raw before import, I would use that as well. _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Martin (KDE)
Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Martin (KDE):
> Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123: > > This is a follow up to my "How does digiKam do raw conversions > > for the slide shows ?" post from earlier today. > > > > So... I shot 600 raws at a wedding last weekend. In digiKam the > > previews of these files look awesome. Apparently they come from > > a jpg embedded in the raw file. > > > > I need to convert the raws to jpegs. I also have another 2,000 > > or so raws to convert. > > > > The problem with converting raws to jpegs automatically is that > > they almost never look as good as the preview images. Please > > don't tell me to shoot jpgs alone because when I spend a lot of > > time on an image I can get it looking a lot better than than the > > preview image, especially if the white balance is out and I > > happened to shoot a grey card image from which to adjust the > > white balance. This happens frequently when I shoot in mixed > > lighting situations, which happens from time to time. > > > > If I were a lazy man I would just extract the jpgs from the raw > > files. But that seems like a waste given that we have all these > > fancy raw converters and all the glorious raw pixel data sitting > > in the raw file. > > > > I've used a number of tools (ufraw, Raw Studio and the digiKam > > tools) and they usually come out looking pretty horid. I can't > > figure out why. The white balance is usually way out, the > > saturation usually needs adjustment and sometimes even the > > exposure is off. I can fix all this stuff, but it takes a lot > > of TIME. I'm looking for something that doesn't take a lot of > > hand tweaking. > > > > This raw conversion issue is a big problem for me. Its the main > > bottleneck in my whole photography workflow, now that I have > > digiKam anyway. Before everything was a bottleneck. Now only > > raw conversion is. digiKam rocks ! > > > > FWIW, I have raw images from a D50, 40D and 450D. > > > > So how do you convert your raws to jpgs automatically and get a > > good result, ie something close to the preview jpg ? I would > > prefer to use the tools in digiKam but will consider using > > outside tools and eventually write a plugin to use them in > > digiKam. > > I usually use UFRaw to set exposure, white balance etc. and safe it > as ID file only (ID file contains settings only and is much faster > to save than a jpeg or png). After that is done, I run ufraw-batch > with the ID files (which can take very long). > > I have created a curve which matches (almost) the EOS30D one. I use > the EOS standard icc profile with gamma set to 0.45 and linearity > to 0.1. Additionally I set saturation to 1.1 and enabled auto > black-point adjustment. I have done (once again) a test to get almost the same result from raw as I had as jpeg. With the standard ICC canon file as input I have to change saturation in ufraw to 1.5 and I get almost the same result (besides raw file is much crisper). > > Most raw files looks pretty good with this settings. If many > pictures can be developed the same way, you can use one ID file > for many raw pictures. But I take the extra time to set some > values for every picture. > > My results mostly looks better than the embedded jpegs. Color is a > little less intensive but I think more accurate. > > Martin > > > Thanks > > _______________________________________________ > 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: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Linuxguy123
Linuxguy123 píše v St 23. 12. 2009 v 13:06 -0700:
> > Did you know that one can extract the icc file from the raw file using > Exiftool ? http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/ I would be surprised if that is true for Canon raw files. Nikon supposedly stores ICC profiles in NEF, but Canon? I do not think so. Canon only stores information about the target profile for converted picture (sRGB, AdobeRGB) and this can be changed in DPP anyway. regards, Milan Knizek knizek (dot) confy (at) volny (dot) cz http://www.milan-knizek.net - About linux and photography (Czech language only) _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Martin (KDE)
On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 22:03 +0100, Martin (KDE) wrote:
> I have done (once again) a test to get almost the same result from > raw > as I had as jpeg. With the standard ICC canon file as input I have to > change saturation in ufraw to 1.5 and I get almost the same result > (besides raw file is much crisper). Please share how you obtained and used the ICC file. I suspect that is the key to getting a raw converter to give us in camera like results. And yes it will be much crisper. _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Milan Knížek
On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 22:21 +0100, Milan Knížek wrote:
> Linuxguy123 píše v St 23. 12. 2009 v 13:06 -0700: > > > > > Did you know that one can extract the icc file from the raw file using > > Exiftool ? http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/ > > I would be surprised if that is true for Canon raw files. Nikon > supposedly stores ICC profiles in NEF, but Canon? I do not think so. > > Canon only stores information about the target profile for converted > picture (sRGB, AdobeRGB) and this can be changed in DPP anyway. Well.. one thing Canon does give us is a lower resolution jpeg. From that jpeg alone it should be possible to adjust things until we get the same exposure levels, color profile, etc. between both. I would love to get an image that matched the in camera image as a starting point. From there I could easily tweak it. But getting there on a picture by picture basis is time consuming. _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Linuxguy123
Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123:
> On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 22:03 +0100, Martin (KDE) wrote: > > I have done (once again) a test to get almost the same result > > from raw > > as I had as jpeg. With the standard ICC canon file as input I > > have to change saturation in ufraw to 1.5 and I get almost the > > same result (besides raw file is much crisper). > > Please share how you obtained and used the ICC file. I suspect > that is the key to getting a raw converter to give us in camera > like results. It is not that hard to do. All the ICC files are packed in the DPP installation file. Once you have extracted this files (most likely by installation) you have to pick the right one. Sadly Canon choosed to name the files by numbers which do not match any logic relation to the camera model name. But there are web sites out there which bring these relation i.e. http://blog.maashoek.nl/2007/07/icc-color-profiles-for-canon-cameras/ But these files can only give you a approximate profile. Best is to buy a IT8 target (about 10-20 Euro) and take a photo of it under cloudy daylight. With this picture (and the famous argyllcms) you can create a exact ICC profile of your camera. Martin > > And yes it will be much crisper. > > _______________________________________________ > 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: How do you generate good quality jpegs from raws quickly, automatically ?
|
|
On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 23:41 +0100, Martin (KDE) wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 23. Dezember 2009 schrieb Linuxguy123: > > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 22:03 +0100, Martin (KDE) wrote: > > > I have done (once again) a test to get almost the same result > > > from raw > > > as I had as jpeg. With the standard ICC canon file as input I > > > have to change saturation in ufraw to 1.5 and I get almost the > > > same result (besides raw file is much crisper). > > > > Please share how you obtained and used the ICC file. I suspect > > that is the key to getting a raw converter to give us in camera > > like results. > > It is not that hard to do. All the ICC files are packed in the DPP > installation file. Once you have extracted this files (most likely by > installation) you have to pick the right one. Sadly Canon choosed to > name the files by numbers which do not match any logic relation to the > camera model name. But there are web sites out there which bring these > relation i.e. > http://blog.maashoek.nl/2007/07/icc-color-profiles-for-canon-cameras/ > > But these files can only give you a approximate profile. Best is to > buy a IT8 target (about 10-20 Euro) and take a photo of it under > cloudy daylight. With this picture (and the famous argyllcms) you can > create a exact ICC profile of your camera. Very informative. Thanks. I've never seen this discussed anywhere before. _______________________________________________ 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 |