Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'The non-hacking solution' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
The non-hacking solution
Authored by: pediger on Feb 08, '10 01:47:01PM

Works! Very cool. Thanks. I'm new to both RAW and the S90, so I'm still wading through how to best to work with its RAW files.

A few notes:
- I get similar, though not identical, results from Adobe DNG Converter, Lightroom (3 Beta), and changing the tag to PowerShot G11
- All of the above methods differ from the results I get from Canon's DPP tool, sometimes dramatically. I understand it may be futile to try to duplicate DPP's rendering elsewhere, but DPP sometimes produces results by default that I prefer.
- exiftool (v8.08, so slightly older) is available from MacPorts: sudo port install p5-image-exiftool
- exiftool -s <filename> lists all of the exif tags in their shortened format, e.g., CanonModelID vs. Canon Model ID.
- There are two tags that identify the camera: CanonModelID and Model (or Camera Model Name). The second is apparently what is displayed by most tools when viewing exif data. The first must be what Apple uses to support RAW.

Cheers



[ Reply to This | # ]
The non-hacking solution
Authored by: sv1cec on Feb 14, '10 07:23:42AM

Well, my procedure seems to be useless now that Apple announced Aperture 3 and posted the new Digital Camera Support (DCS) package, which supports the Canon S90 raw.

However I noticed one issue with the latest DCS, which is probably due to distortion correction applied. Have a look at the two images below.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/sv1cec/posts_pictures/2Resized.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/sv1cec/posts_pictures/1Resized.jpg

The first is produced with the procedure outlined above, while the second is from the same image shown with Xee. As you can see the second image is cropped on all four sides.

Also, I discovered that my procedure introduces a "hot pixel" in the CR2 files treated.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/sv1cec/posts_pictures/IMG_0333_pixel.jpg

Can you please tell me if you can see that pixel too?



[ Reply to This | # ]