free S7000/S5000 RAW decoder with GUI.
try it.
http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-PaloAlto/9919/s7raw.html
try it.
http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-PaloAlto/9919/s7raw.html
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
free S5000/S7000 RAW file decoder with GUI
- Thread starter s7raw
- Start date
Lo Yuk Fai
Leading Member
Wow... This is exciting... Could you tell us more info about the program?
This is most interesting
I assume you are in Japan?
What are the opinions of the S7000/S5000 and F700 in Japan?
Are you aware that in this group that we have some MSDOS command line raw translators for the S7000 S5000 and F700?
in fact Lo Yuk Fai has a shell program for Fer's S5000/S7000 raw converter.
Is anyone in Japan aware that the F700 does not use the R sensor when producing a jpeg image in the camera? (if you did the S5000 and S7000 adding the F700 to your software is very easy).
Since the translator programs are so limited, is there a way to communicate better with fuji users in Japan?
Also, what algorithm is being used to interpolate sensors into pixlel images in this program?
David
I assume you are in Japan?
What are the opinions of the S7000/S5000 and F700 in Japan?
Are you aware that in this group that we have some MSDOS command line raw translators for the S7000 S5000 and F700?
in fact Lo Yuk Fai has a shell program for Fer's S5000/S7000 raw converter.
Is anyone in Japan aware that the F700 does not use the R sensor when producing a jpeg image in the camera? (if you did the S5000 and S7000 adding the F700 to your software is very easy).
Since the translator programs are so limited, is there a way to communicate better with fuji users in Japan?
Also, what algorithm is being used to interpolate sensors into pixlel images in this program?
David
ok two more questions
We have heard about a fuji HS-V2 software. Is this available in japan?
Also, Fuji announced a firmware upgrade for the F700, this seems to be something new for Fuji. Have people been taking advantage of this?
David
We have heard about a fuji HS-V2 software. Is this available in japan?
Also, Fuji announced a firmware upgrade for the F700, this seems to be something new for Fuji. Have people been taking advantage of this?
David
Yes,so sorry for my bad English.
I have a S7000. Considering the price, I am mostly satisfied.
But in Japanese web sites, they say worse for S5000/S7000 cause the pictures look "thick", like oil paintings.
Yes, I know. But I have not been satisfied so I made this program.
I may support F700 in future. But It is still undecided at the moment because I do not have one.
No idea. Most Japanese, including me, can read English mostly but they can hardliy write down in English. There's a high barrier between us.
It's my original one. Sorry I cannot explain the detail here.
Yes. But I do not have.
In Japan, many manufacturers have stared to support PICTbridge. It's a fashion.
Fuji rarely provides upgrading firmwares unless they have some bugs, but in this case Fuji was cornerd to support PICTbridge, that's why Fuji provided F700's new firmware, I imagine.
s7raw
ianR
Veteran Member
Thank you and congratulations.
That's a beautifully written program.
It does so many things in such a small program!!!
Incredible to keep it all down to less than 350kb.
Very very impressive, and the output quality is excellent too.
My computer clearly needs more memory though. How fast can you process a file with it on a really fast computer?
Thanks again
Ian
That's a beautifully written program.
It does so many things in such a small program!!!
Incredible to keep it all down to less than 350kb.
Very very impressive, and the output quality is excellent too.
My computer clearly needs more memory though. How fast can you process a file with it on a really fast computer?
Thanks again
Ian
WOW, seems like a masterwork!!
Impressive piece of software... reminds me of PowerShovel2 for Canons... very very interesting!!!! Congratulations!!!
Im using it under XP (1024x768), and I got a little bug: the program window does not resize, nor maximize, properly: so if I rotate the image (portrait orientation) I only see a portion of the toolbars, and so.
Apart from that, it's already very useable and complete!!
Keep on the good work, thanks!!
Fer
--
Usefilm portfolio: http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/18417.html
bunhill
Member
This is very interesting. Thanks to the author for posting this and congratulations.
Initial observations (with S7000 images and Photosphop):
1. The software is capable of producing a 16bit image. The Fuji software produces only an 8 bit image. Obviously, therefore, larger: 72 MB compared with 36 MB.
2. The software produces a slighly larger image than the Fuji software - 4096 x 3072 versus 4048 x 3040.
3. The software offers some pre - processing possibilities and produces a PSD file.
I am unclear as to whether these apparent improvements offer any real technical advantages. I'd be very interested to know what others here think.
So far (and I've only used this for a couple of hours) I prefer the tones of the images produced by the Fuji software. Maybe I just haven't yet got my head around using this right.
The images produced by this software seem less noisy than those produced with the Fuji RAW converter though at the size I print (A3+) I have no problems with noise.
Initial observations (with S7000 images and Photosphop):
1. The software is capable of producing a 16bit image. The Fuji software produces only an 8 bit image. Obviously, therefore, larger: 72 MB compared with 36 MB.
2. The software produces a slighly larger image than the Fuji software - 4096 x 3072 versus 4048 x 3040.
3. The software offers some pre - processing possibilities and produces a PSD file.
I am unclear as to whether these apparent improvements offer any real technical advantages. I'd be very interested to know what others here think.
So far (and I've only used this for a couple of hours) I prefer the tones of the images produced by the Fuji software. Maybe I just haven't yet got my head around using this right.
The images produced by this software seem less noisy than those produced with the Fuji RAW converter though at the size I print (A3+) I have no problems with noise.
I don't know... isn't it the GUI from Peter?
Anyway, if all your images are similar as for white balance, you method should work just fine!
Fer
--
Usefilm portfolio: http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/18417.html
==================I don't know... isn't it the GUI from Peter?
Anyway, if all your images are similar as for white balance, you
method should work just fine!
Fer
--
Usefilm portfolio: http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/18417.html
Since all three converters are fine volunteer efforts, I am not in the mode of criticizing or detailed comparisons.....YET. I would be very interested in your comparative evaluation and recommendation among the three converters. I only use the program to generate the best image to import to PS6 and my trial version of PictureWindow Pro for post processing. Can you make any positive but analytical statement about which converter is the best right now?
TMc
Well, at the moment it seems to me that this one (from S7Raw) is the best.
Quality-wise I don't see much difference between this one and S7000Raw (all settings made equal): but this one's so easy to use!! And have that nice white balance neutral picker, and live histograms.... very, very nice indeed!
Fer
--
Usefilm portfolio: http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/18417.html
Lo Yuk Fai
Leading Member
Agree, this one offers much more functions indeed.
S7Raw is light years ahead in user interface.
You can do the same things with S7000Raw and photoshop but it will take you longer.
I would say that the interpolation is a simpler scheme than Fer's program. Most likely bilinear. That is my judgement from the S7000 image i have processed.
I think bilinear is still in S7000Raw??? In certain cases it gives a very nice image. It will not be as sharp but does tend to filter out noise.
I wrote to the author of the program and asked him if he would consider collaborating with Fer and myself.
Fer with the S5000
Me with the F700
and S7Raw with the S7000
That should about cover all of the bases.
On the face of it, S7raw appears to extract the thumbnail from the raw file and display that and then match the default settings to approximate that image?
A very ingenius approach. And also, there was a good deal of work to get the color close.
David
You can do the same things with S7000Raw and photoshop but it will take you longer.
I would say that the interpolation is a simpler scheme than Fer's program. Most likely bilinear. That is my judgement from the S7000 image i have processed.
I think bilinear is still in S7000Raw??? In certain cases it gives a very nice image. It will not be as sharp but does tend to filter out noise.
I wrote to the author of the program and asked him if he would consider collaborating with Fer and myself.
Fer with the S5000
Me with the F700
and S7Raw with the S7000
That should about cover all of the bases.
On the face of it, S7raw appears to extract the thumbnail from the raw file and display that and then match the default settings to approximate that image?
A very ingenius approach. And also, there was a good deal of work to get the color close.
David
---------------------------------------------
HELLO FUJI..................Do yourself a big favor and pay all of these guys a signing bonus, take their hard work, polish it to meet your support needs, and sell lots of new cameras by providing the converter to all S5000, S7000 and S700 owner/buyers. Not really a tough decision is it ???
TMc
Thank you for your evaluation. It's my pleasure if it's helpful for you.
Yes, s7raw needs huge memory.
If your computer accesses to disk while my program is showing "PASSn xx%", your computer needs more memory.
But anyway s7raw is not fast even with enough memory. enough memory... at least 384MB or so.
s7raw
-------------------------------
Please help me here..... I am in trial demo of PictureWindow Pro 3.5 and it handles 48-bit images. Help me understand the process (loss of image quality or not) using original s7000 raw converters you guys did....providing 48-bit .psd, and later, 48-bit .tif. I could input .tif to PWPro and post process. New s7raw provides 16-bit and 8-bit.....why would I not prefer to use 48-bit as input to PWPro? I know that PS uses 16-bit and 8-bit so that would be a typical conversion for many users. Any other comment will help me better understand how to proceed. I'm guessing that PS CS's new RAW converter will likely also be 16-bit or 8-bit (possibly 24-bit?). Do you disagree about the advantage of working with 48-bit in PWPro? Is the difference too subtle for me to care about? Thanks.
TMc
BigWaveDave
Senior Member
When we say "16 bits", we intend "16 bits per channel, per pixel", so 48 bits per pixel in total.
While "8 bits" means "8 x R,G,B = 24".
So use "16 bit" output from those raw converters, and import the resulting TIFF or PSD into PWP (will be 48 bpp): you'll get optimal results.
Fer
--
Usefilm portfolio: http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/18417.html
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum