Roland Karlsson
Forum Pro
Hmmmm .... this sounds unlikely. It looks the same and it quacks the same. And they are no software gurus at Sigma. Is it not more likely that it is the same software, slightly tweaked?
Last edited:
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
LuLa Review
- Thread starter mmr
- Start date
victorgv
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,295
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 1,569
Roland Karlsson
Forum Pro
victorgv
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,295
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 1,569
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner
Forum Pro
I'm a little surprised so many people questioned this aspect, there are a lot of aspects that show it's written in C# (using Mono in fact), the main one I see is in the Mac application bundle there's a folder just inside called "MonoBundle" or something along those lines (that did not exist in prior versions), with tons of mono DLL's... you can also find down inside a number of mono bundles with SPP code, and if you profile the application using Xcode instruments it's pretty obvious mono is being used.
Actually Silicon Valley is the worst place to hire good programmers since they would be very expensive there, and you are competing against the likes of Google and Apple to acquire and retain them. They need to be there to keep the engineering talent that is vital to them though...
it's a sign of a company that outsources a lot of software, probably most of SPP.
The exact structure is hard to say but it's probably along those lines.
JackM
Veteran Member
I'm relatively new to the Foveon world, but I think I've been doing well by using SPP only to export the RAWs to TIFFs and then work on the TIFFs in Lightroom as I would with my Canon files. Is this not advisable?
M
maceoQ
Guest
It is, but you should do the WB first and especially recover highlights, because they are lost in the TIFF. Also SPP is doing some sharpening already. So there are a few adjustments that should be done before exporting to LR.
JackM
Veteran Member
Aha, thanks. I was suspecting some highlights were getting lost.
Last edited:
Roland Karlsson
Forum Pro
That is a valid argument, I have to admit.
But, why make a totally new version with the same problems?
Roland Karlsson
Forum Pro
Maybe because it is surprising.
Hmmmmm .... OK ... it seems you have good evidence.
Then we only have to try to understand why they make a total make over that behaves the same.
victorgv
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,295
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 1,569
Roland Karlsson
Forum Pro
Maybe,
But you can do optimisations.
- You can redraw the part you see first.
- You can redraw with lower resolution.
- You can have a pipelined approach where the last parts are e.g. white balance, easy stuff that can be recomputed fast, maybe even in the GPU.
- You can redraw the image while recomputing, showing the effect directly.
Well, your experience doesn't match the test images very well. I'll let people make their own judgments, based on test images. I exported 16 bit (per color) TIFF images from the raw files to do this test. Notice I did not use the red-over-blue swatch in the DPreview test images, which is the Merrill's strong point and the Bayer CFA weak point in that image. These are based on the test images from Imaging-Resource.
These images show that the SD1 is a lot closer to the D800 than the D610 (please make sure you view them full-size):
Nikon D610 test image from Imaging-Resource (upscaled to 30,000 pixels across).
Sigma SD1 test image from Imaging-Resource (upscaled to 30,000 pixels across).
Nikon D800 test image from Imaging-Resource (upscaled to 30,000 pixels across).
As you can see, the SD1 image here is MUCH closer to the D800 image than the D610 image, and that's with a zoom lens on the SD1. The D610 has all the advantage of at least two years of extra development too. The 50mm f1.4 A would make a difference on the SD1, bringing it closer to the results of the DP2 Merrill. I think the DP2 Merrill would match the D800, but Imaging-Resource did not test that camera. The DP2 Quattro matches the D800E for sure . . . and it might even beat it. My results have shown me that it produces some parts of the test image better than the D810 or the Sony A7r . . . or even the Pentax 645 D or 645 Z. (no moiré in the green part a the top of the beer bottle label or in other parts of the image)
There will always be people who say you have to process it more or something like that. Well, I say that you have to be as scientific as possible, so I try not to do anything differently to one image vs. another. I have upscaled the images to the same horizontal size, because that shows the detail differences best, when we look at jpegs on-line.
Do you have any samples or links for me to see?
JackM
Veteran Member
How so? Demosaicing involves calculating R, G, B values at every pixel, right? While the Foveon sensor just gives you R, G, B for every pixel right off the sensor, all ready to go! There no further calculation necessary, AFAIK! At least this is how Foveon has been marketed. So either A) they lied about that, or B) they're really bad at writing software!
M
maceoQ
Guest
Yes, not studio samples, but real life samples.
Sony A7r with the 35mm Zeiss vs. Sigma DP2m (45mm)
If you look at the crops (DP2m interpolated to 24MP), you will notice a slight advantage for the A7r, now imagine how the advantage would be with a 45mm lens attached to the Sony.
Last edited:
M
maceoQ
Guest
both
I would say they mislead people (lied) about how simple it is to produce full-color pixels from each x-y spatial location on the sensor. Otherwise the camera could produce TIFF and JPEG images very quickly and easily . . . right in the camera. It's obviously not as simple as capturing R, G, and B values from the sensor and that's that. There is white balance involved. There are lots of other things involved too, I suspect.
Frankly, I think you are oversimplifying the situation, and you are guilty of the same thing Sigma is guilty of . . . misleading.
Roland Karlsson
Forum Pro
I agree. Irony is not all that easy. And often not so funny.
Similar threads
- User review
- User review
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum