I have changed my mind.

Started Mar 23, 2008 | Discussions
gollywop
gollywop Veteran Member • Posts: 8,284
Steve: can you post an example?

It's hard to believe; I've certainly never found this. But you could very well be right. So an example would be greatly appreciated. Can you post an NEF?

thanks,

-- hide signature --

gollywop

-----------

David Chin Forum Pro • Posts: 11,670
Of course ..

... the Viveza is a Photoshop plugin that one pays an extra for, approx USD250, if I'm not mistaken.

That feature comes with NX already, and NX came with the D300, so it's a no brainer in my situation.

I do intend to provide some comparison samples as soon as my iMac returns from the service center, but would probably need assistance from those who have already calibrated their Photoshop software with the Fors script.

I have to admit being a little intimidated by what's required for calibration: http://www.photoactivity.com/Pagine/Articoli/023%20Calibratori%20al%20sole/Calibratori%20al%20sole_en.asp

kovacj wrote:

The default results from various RAW converters are certainly
different, but I am not sure how you would qualify one as "better"
than the others? My "preference" is for Lightroom/ACR conversions
that are calibrated with the Fors script, yields very natural skin
tones to my eyes. On the handful of images that I tried, I found
nothing "special" about the NX conversion.

Kind regards,
Jarek

-- hide signature --

Regards, David Chin
Digital photography notes and stuff:
http://www.dpnotes.com/

kovacj Contributing Member • Posts: 520
Re: ACR Calibration...

Calibrating is very straightforward. Hardest part is plunking down $100 for some bits of coloring paper (ColorChecker). I just followed the instructions on the Chromoholics site: http://fors.net/chromoholics/support/?w=GettingStarted

The good news in all this is that both NX and ACR are both really good RAW converters, it's just that I don't believe in the almost magical powers that NX supposedly has (whereas the NX usability issues are all too real).

Cheers,
Jarek

gollywop
gollywop Veteran Member • Posts: 8,284
David: check these out.

David Chin wrote:

I have to admit being a little intimidated by what's required for
calibration:

David: it's really no big deal to do the calibration once you've got the GretagMacbeth color checker (in the $70 range). However, I really do recommend you avoid the Fors method for either Rags or Tindemans. My strong preference is for Tindemans, but his method also works best (but not only) with his Scene-Referred method and his PS Action or his Luminosity plug-in, all of which is a bit more complicated.

The Fors script tends to produce colors that are a bit too saturated. You may, however, like this -- so who's to say?

If you are looking for information on the various scripts, I would not recommend the site you've listed. Rather, look at

Rags at:
http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/ColorCalibration/

Tindemans at:
http://21stcenturyshoebox.com/tools/ACRcalibrator.html

Fors at:
http://www.fors.net/chromoholics/

-- hide signature --

gollywop

-----------

pghaworth Senior Member • Posts: 1,487
Re: Runs fine on this box...

Jake Loves Good Glass wrote:

Intel Core 2 Duo 6650 2.33ghz
Nvidia 9600 (actually worked fine with the old 8400 as well)
4 GB of Corsair gaming ram
Vista 32bit (although I will upgrade to 64 when I upgrade to quad
core and want more ram. Still bummed that I only get 3.25gb with
Vista 32)
Capture NX 1.3

If your computer can't handle it then maybe you should look at
upgrading. You can build this system with a good gygabit motherboard
and box for right about a thousand.

Just upgraded mine but even so I still prefer ACR. I've tried and tried but NX just isn't user friendly.
--
Perspective is Everything

David Chin Forum Pro • Posts: 11,670
TQ very much for the links ...

.. I'm always open to new ways of doing things, and blending various approaches.

I'll definitely read the stuff you linked to, thanks again.

gollywop wrote:

Rags at:
http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/ColorCalibration/

Tindemans at:
http://21stcenturyshoebox.com/tools/ACRcalibrator.html

Fors at:
http://www.fors.net/chromoholics/

-- hide signature --

Regards, David Chin
Digital photography notes and stuff:
http://www.dpnotes.com/

Iliah Borg Forum Pro • Posts: 25,823
Re: It would be difficult NOT to perform those edits in PS3.

What was interesting about Steve's original post, is that he claims
that he can do something in NX that he cannot do relatively easily in
ACR (I am paraphrasing).

The reason is very simple. ACR/LR use the white balance algorithm that is very far from what Nikon recommend and using in their products. One of the results of that is blown-out channels. The other is propagation of noise from the most underexposed channel to other, well-exposed channels.

-- hide signature --

no text

Iliah Borg Forum Pro • Posts: 25,823
Re: no problem on my part

As someone who has worked on the development process of actual RAW
converters and understands what happens under the hood

[snip]

a little more sharpening is added during the demosaic process

Reading it together, amazing

-- hide signature --

no text

Steve Bingham
OP Steve Bingham Forum Pro • Posts: 26,291
Re: no problem on my part

knickerhawk wrote:

Steve Bingham wrote:

You are correct. However, I have neen using Photoshop for 18 years
(Feb 2000) and taught it at the local college. I pretty much know
what it can do. :^) In fact, until this latest version of Capture it
was my converter of choice. And, yes I still use it along with
Capture.

I guess those were dog years?!?

Terrible math! Try 1990. I only missed by 10 years! :^) Funny.

Anyway, I agree with you and am only surprised that it took you this
long to discover the IQ advantages of NX. Julia/Illiah and others
have periodically posted side-by-sides and other definitive examples
of where ACR trips up compared to NX (and some other converters). As
you discovered, it particularly comes out in microdetail and more
headroom in the channels.

Agreed.

Color profiles, curves etc. don't overcome

the fundamental differences in the algorithms being used.

Workflows, user interface, speed etc. may push some users back to
ACR/CS3, but if you want to squeeze out the best base image possible
from the RAW, then you should be looking at other converters than
ACR...and you should be looking very hard at NX.

-- hide signature --
 Steve Bingham's gear list:Steve Bingham's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D7200 Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR +20 more
Steve Bingham
OP Steve Bingham Forum Pro • Posts: 26,291
Re: It would be difficult NOT to perform those edits in PS3.

Iliah Borg wrote:

What was interesting about Steve's original post, is that he claims
that he can do something in NX that he cannot do relatively easily in
ACR (I am paraphrasing).

The reason is very simple. ACR/LR use the white balance algorithm
that is very far from what Nikon recommend and using in their
products. One of the results of that is blown-out channels.

Boy did I find that out with my wildflowers!

The other

is propagation of noise from the most underexposed channel to other,
well-exposed channels.

Saw that too.

-- hide signature --

no text

 Steve Bingham's gear list:Steve Bingham's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D7200 Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR +20 more
gollywop
gollywop Veteran Member • Posts: 8,284
Iliah, are you implying

that sharpening cannot be applied during demosaicing?

-- hide signature --

gollywop

-----------

Mike Worley
Mike Worley Senior Member • Posts: 1,486
Hmmmm . . .

. . . very interesting points, Steve. Since I am somewhat technically challenged and reluctant to try to learn new stuff (just installed CS3 after buying it months ago), I never delved into the mysteries of Capture.

But with the flurry of poppies down here this year (by Arizona standards, anyhow) I was out photographing them in all kinds of light. Found that I consistently had to dial in -.7 or more of compensation so as not to blow the red channel (at least as far as ACR is concerned).

The result was images that were too dark and that I have not been sufficiently excited about to try to fix. Maybe some work with the Shadow/Highlight tool . . . I dunno. Anyhow, all of this really irritates me when I think of all the cholla I tangled with trying to get into just the right place.

Maybe I should give Capture a whirl. Or just photograph green stuff.

Mike

Brian OReilly Contributing Member • Posts: 640
Something nobody has mentioned...

... as far as I can see in this thread is:

CNX has the ability to store multiple 'versions' of the original - within the NEF file, for a minute increase in file size.

Not only does this save space - it also prevents the nightmare of keeping track of countless - often gigantic - intermediate files and sidecar files.

I am still trying to work out a 'seamless' method of combining Aperture and CNX - bot of which have great features

Brian

Jake Loves Good Glass Senior Member • Posts: 1,434
Re: Runs fine on this box...

I had the same impression at first. The real issue is that they don't even try and work like Adobe. One day I just forced myself to sit down and use NX and found that once you get past the learning curve, the program is just fine. If you have already done this then it just probably isn't for you.

I really like the layer free editing, the fact that I can keep the files in native NEF and convert easily to Tiff for any work that I do end up needing to take to another program. I also like the selective color manipulation and zone correction method of working. It's a little different and took some getting used to, but once I saw the benefits of it and had a better understanding of how it functioned I started to see the merits of the system.
--
Wow...that's a pretty killer camera! Are you any good?

-Jake-

Flashlight Veteran Member • Posts: 7,892
Re: Hmmmm . . .

Mike Worley wrote:

Found that I consistently had to dial in -.7 or more of
compensation so as not to blow the red channel (at least as far as
ACR is concerned).

The result was images that were too dark and that I have not been
sufficiently excited about to try to fix.

Maybe I should give Capture a whirl. Or just photograph green stuff.

I distinctly remeber a post from you years ago where you said you never bothered to go out in sunshine and only shot with overcast skies, where I like nothing better than blazing sunshine with a cristal clear atmosphere

Forget the 'highlight tools' and whatnot. If the light is hard, just accept that the shadows wil be very dark and change composition accordingly. In other words, different types of light, different types of photos. In images, this is what I mean:
http://www.pbase.com/flashlight/walkingaround_01

Hope this makes sense.

-- hide signature --

Philip

pierre1
pierre1 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,160
This D3 phot. Jonas seems to have nailed his work flow.
Iliah Borg Forum Pro • Posts: 25,823
Re: Iliah, are you implying

gollywop wrote:

that sharpening cannot be applied during demosaicing?

Sharpening can only be applied before, and/or after demosaicing. During demosaicing it is not sharpening, it is a different and sharper demosaicing algorithm.

-- hide signature --

no text

gollywop
gollywop Veteran Member • Posts: 8,284
Re: Iliah, are you implying

A new image sharpening approach for single-sensor digital cameras

Rastislav Lukac 1 , Konstantinos N. Plataniotis 2
1Epson Edge, Epson Canada Ltd., M1W 3Z5 Toronto, Ontario, Canada

2The Edward S. Rogers Sr. Department of ECE, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3G4, Canada
email: Rastislav Lukac (lukacr@ieee.org)

KEYWORDS

digital color imaging • single-sensor camera • color filter array • Bayer pattern • demosaicking • image sharpening

ABSTRACT

This article introduces a new image sharpening approach suitable for single-sensor digital cameras equipped with a Bayer color filter array (CFA). The proposed solution firstly enhances the structural content of the captured CFA image data. Subsequent demosaicking of the enhanced CFA image data produces a visually pleasing full-color image which is noticeably sharper compared to the output of the traditional imaging pipeline. Results reported in this work suggest a three-fold processing cost reduction when the new approach is followed. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Int J Imaging Syst Technol, 17, 123-131, 2007

Received: 25 February 2007; Accepted: 30 August 2007

Adaptive demosaicking
Rajeev Ramanath and Wesley E. Snyder

North Carolina State University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Box 7914, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-7914

(Received Oct. 1, 2002; revised Apr. 4, 2003; accepted May 15, 2003)

Digital still color cameras sample the visible spectrum using an array of color filters overlaid on a CCD, such that each pixel samples only one color band. The resulting mosaic of color samples is processed to produce a high-resolution color image, such that a value of a color band not sampled at a certain location is estimated from its neighbors. This is often referred to as "demosaicking." The human retina has a similar structure, although the distribution of cones is not as regular. Motivated by the human visual system, we propose an adaptive demosaicking technique in the framework of bilateral filtering. This approach provides us with a means to denoise, sharpen, and demosaic the image simultaneously. The proposed method, along with a variety of existing demosaicking strategies, are run on synthetic images and real-world images for comparative purposes. A recently proposed image comparison measure geared specifically toward demosaicking has also been applied to these images to provide a performance measure. ©2003 SPIE and IS&T.

-- hide signature --

gollywop

-----------

Iliah Borg Forum Pro • Posts: 25,823
Re: Iliah, are you implying

This article introduces a new image sharpening approach suitable for
single-sensor digital cameras equipped with a Bayer color filter
array (CFA). The proposed solution firstly enhances the structural
content of the captured CFA image data. Subsequent demosaicking of
the enhanced CFA image data

Firstly enhances, then demosaics. I never wrote papers on that, instead I participated in implementation of such an approach in RML (2005) and RPP (2007).

This approach provides us with a means to denoise,
sharpen, and demosaic the image simultaneously.

Simultaniously as in one pass? Or is it a sharper demosaicing?

You also need to define "sharpening". Do you go by the definition that is commonly accepted in image processing?

Why would you think being an active raw converters developer I do not know what are the recent publications and algorithms?

-- hide signature --

no text

Mel Penner New Member • Posts: 1
Re: What kind of Mac?

RafaelD7 wrote:

DougAbbott wrote:

That's great news.

Unfortunately, NX 1.3.x still doesn't recognize the D300 NEF files on
my Leopard Mac. Like many Mac users we're anxiously awaiting Nikon's
fix to this perpelxing problem.

Doug,

I have an Intel Mac (iMac 24", white) running Leopard 10.5.2 and NX
opens my D300 NEF's just fine. The only problem I've had is with the
upgrade - it stalls when it tries to download it from within NX. I
went to the Nikon site, downloaded the upgrade myself and installed
it. Problem is, the version number did not get updated and NX still
wants to download the upgrade...

Rafael,

I had the same problem. Wrote to Nikon and they told me to remove Nikon Message Center (NkMC) from the folders. Did it and I'm no longer bothered with the constant attempt to download an already installed upgrade.

Mel Penner

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads