Canon Line Offset Noise

Started Oct 20, 2009 | Discussions thread
ohyva Veteran Member • Posts: 6,342
Re: The question I've got is...

My point was and is, any processing like the proposed limits more or less the possibilities in RAW tools. So I prefer the RAW file to have the raw data as it comes out from the ADC circuitry. That may not look so nice, and may not give so nice scores in DxOmark or DPR raw tests, but after all it gives the possibilities for the best RAW tool manufacturers to make the best possible tools to provide the best possible results out from these RAW files. Processing done in the FW is usually quite difficult to undone even when its know what was done - which is usually not the case.

I'm sure Canon will make what is needed in their FW for the JPEG generation and in their DPP - and there IMHO Canon should make the "data correction". And I'm sure Adobe etc make at least the proposed simple equalization for the raw data - if not in their 1st tool release, then in some update.

And of course it's good to get info that the basic correction is simple to make. So every thanks to John for that.

Mrs Reality wrote:

ohyva wrote:

So if I understood you right, you propose Canon should manipulate the sensor raw data before writing the RAW file to memory card. I'm definitely against that as there may be better ways to do the data clean-up than what would have been implemented in the FW. I do not really mind what the RAW files look as long as they can be converted the best possible images.

If the correction is that simple, every RAW tool should implement that with no difficulties. And Canon to do something similar in their FW for JPEGs. And the best tool developers can then implement perhaps even better ways to handle this.

Every Raw image is already manipulated. The processor in the camera uses an algorithm to make a visible image out of electronic data. Each manufacturer has their own in-camera algorithms and they also have their own proprietary Raw converters. Generic Raw converters also manipulate, or rather interpret and process data differently.

You might notice all the talk about Adobe Camera Raw and whether it does a good job or not in converting Raw data. Other Raw converters are also mentioned a lot. People often say that one converter works better than other converters, and especially with certain camera models or brands. This shows that all Raw data isn't the same and all converters aren't the same.

Sometimes there are image quality problems in a camera that a firmware upgrade fixes. Firmware is actually software in the sense that it's an algorithm that interprets the Raw data and processes it according to the parameters of that algorithm/firmware/software.

The kind of problems John Sheehy and others are talking about can be easily dealt with by Canon with either better design or better firmware or both. It shouldn't be incumbent upon the generic Raw converter makers (like Adobe) or upon the end users to find a way to fix Canon's mistakes.

I think what John is advocating is that Raw images from the 7D and/or other Canon cameras would look better if Canon got its act together in eliminating banding/maze and that there wouldn't be any negative side effects in doing so.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow