Jump to content
bla

M8 goes uncompressed DNG

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Of course DNG. Did you have a look at the dropbox folder from post 1? There are some examples. The 20Mb DNG files have been created from the RAW... (as you can see by their size which is twice the normal size: 8bit=>16bit) (actually it's 14bit stored in 16bit numbers...

 

Arvid

 

I have downloaded your files and I am very impressed with the 14 bit images from the camera, thank you for making this possible.

To see your DNG files in CS6 and work with them reminds me of the first time I saw raw files from my Nikon D1 when I got that many many years ago.

 

Please make your converter available, do consider charging fee or donation.

 

I would happily pay for such software, we pay for many other similar Pro products online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course DNG. Did you have a look at the dropbox folder from post 1? There are some examples. The 20Mb DNG files have been created from the RAW... (as you can see by their size which is twice the normal size: 8bit=>16bit) (actually it's 14bit stored in 16bit numbers...

 

Arvid

 

Arvid,

 

I obeserve your files in the Dropbox by 200% magnification and see what has been described in 1/2007 LFI:

 

1. Right column of page 35: ..."M8's 8 bits per color channel store the square root of the 14 bits delivered by the sensor..."

2. Left column of page 37p: .."M8's picture format is designed to be more discriminating in the darks, and less so in the lights."......

 

Anyway, I wll choose a scene with more light and midtone than dark and take the picture by both JPG fine + DNG and JPG fine + RAW, then observe the difference in JPG fine image, especially in the midtone.

 

I presume the JPG fine together with DNG one will be something like applying a S curve upon the JPG fine with RAW.

 

Best Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

 

Best Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to make it clear; I have no interest in looking at the JPG file at all.

 

The useful benefit will be in the RAW file once converted to DNG. Here you can clearly gain picture quality when working on the file in PP compare to working on the 8bit compressed file we get out of standard DNG from M8.

 

Also the less in camera processing doesn't bother me at all, even when looking at the rear display it is clear that the UV/IR filter does its work very well to correct the sensor/filterpack shortcommings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is Arvid working on jpg files as well? (confused sorry)

 

What Arvid may be planning to do, if any, is to convert a M8 14-bit RAW into the DNG.

 

When M8 8-bit DNG ( 8-bit is the root square of the 14-bit data from M8 sensor, in the binary operations) be imported intp PP software, the file is reversed into 14-bit for the image processing operations. (see LFI 1/2007 & 2/2007)

 

My proposal to compare the JPG-fine images from the two individual settings aims at

making a ballpark guesswork to evaluate the possible improvements ( 14-bit RAW against 8-bit > 14-bit DNG) for our particular scenes of interest at present, before Arvid's conversion APP be available.

 

Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

Edited by Thomas Chen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is Arvid working on jpg files as well? (confused sorry)

 

What Arvid may be planning to do, if any, is to convert a M8 14-bit RAW into the DNG.

 

My proposal to compare the JPG-fine images from the two individual settings aims at

making a ballpark guesswork to evaluate the possible improvements ( 14-bit RAW against 8-bit > 14-bit DNG) for our particular scenes of interest, before Arvid's conversion APP be available.

 

Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Thomas so Arvid doens't tweak the JPG files as i suspected. For sake of comparisons i would rather use the DNG files personally but it's just me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you Thomas so Arvid doens't tweak the JPG files as i suspected. For sake of comparisons i would rather use the DNG files personally but it's just me.

 

Agree!

 

To my knowledge, it's no easy job for RAW conversion to JPG judging from the resources required. DNG may be another story.

 

However, if I'm unable to see much difference from JPG-fine files I will not expect too much on the 14-bit RAW. I'm trying to find an early answer.

 

Best Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you Thomas so Arvid doens't tweak the JPG files as i suspected. For sake of comparisons i would rather use the DNG files personally but it's just me.

 

Perhaps another approach to see the difference is asking somebody to create via M9 or M240 the DNG files respectively by compressed and uncompressed format. An easiest way!

 

Thomas Chen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agree!

...

However, if I'm unable to see much difference from JPG-fine files I will not expect too much on the 14-bit RAW. ...

 

This is why I stated that I am only interested in the RAW files.

 

Thomas, I think you are wrong.

 

There as been a huge improvement in raw converters since the in camera JGP conversion was made for the M8.

 

Judging the JPG files will not show anything regarding the potential of the RAW files converted to DNG and processed in the latest PP software like CS6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is why I stated that I am only interested in the RAW files.

 

Thomas, I think you are wrong.

 

There as been a huge improvement in raw converters since the in camera JGP conversion was made for the M8.

 

Judging the JPG files will not show anything regarding the potential of the RAW files converted to DNG and processed in the latest PP software like CS6.

 

Erik,

 

I think you are right. Thank you!

 

Let's look forward to seeing Arvid's outcome.

 

Best Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One gets rather quick pressing right - right - right - right - left - left - left - right - info - touch shutter after a while...

 

Arvid,

 

Please find from the link

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g1vpc81qywlpl0b/jLusyax2xG

two sets of files for the same scene, one is JPF fine+RAW, the other is JPG fine +DNG. It's a scence with various tonality.

 

They are taken by Summicron 28/2.0 ASPH at f/8 and focus to infinity on a tripod by self timer. The RAW was taken first, next the DNG no later than 15 seconds (power off and do the another setting for JPG fine + DNG)

 

From JPG fine, I tell that from RAW with better contrast compared to that from DNG in the wall of building in the upper right side of the image. I'm not sure whether it is due to light change or the files. Perhaps imagea taken in the studio fit the purpose better.

 

Best Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Thomas,

thanks! I just downloaded, converted your file and uploaded the resulting DNG image (see dropbox from 1st posting). You may have a look and as always: it'd be nice if you could post your findings here

Greetings,

Arvid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the less in camera processing doesn't bother me at all, even when looking at the rear display it is clear that the UV/IR filter does its work very well to correct the sensor/filterpack shortcommings.

 

Erik,

 

Besides eliminating the magenta cast for particular fabric, what's the effect of Leica UV/IR filter?

 

Please advise, thanks.

 

Thomas Chen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Thomas,

thanks! I just downloaded, converted your file and uploaded the resulting DNG image (see dropbox from 1st posting). You may have a look and as always: it'd be nice if you could post your findings here

Greetings,

Arvid

 

Arvid,

 

In CS6 on Mac Pro 15" Retina, both JPG-fine files feature a litter but appreciable green cast and are more obscure in image, Moire effect are badly visible when magnified and compared to their DNG counterparts. Thus, forget the JPGs.

 

Just as I mentioned before, my images were not taken under a controlled light condition, observation may be biased. You had better find another case with controlled light in place for accurate evaluation.

 

I choose a spot where midtone and dark interfaces, the window at the upper right side. magnifying 3200% for the pixel peeping,

 

The DNG (M8 RAW > Arvid DNG) presents a shade better details as well as color and brightness differentiation than the M8 DNG.

 

As the DNG (M8 RAW > Arvid DNG) is menifasted as a Gamma corrected grayscale in the CS6 film slide, while M8 DNG is a color one. I suppose it is CS6 that performs the demosaizing task for your DNG file, while M8 does the demosaizing in the camera itself.

 

A great achievement!

 

I am looking forward to received a OS 10.8 or Win 7 enabled DNG converter and highly appreciate your generosity.

 

Best Regards,

 

 

Thomas Chen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy