Note that PixInsight internally stores values and works on values as floating point values in the range 0.0-1.0 When a raw file is read, it assumes the raw values are integers in the range 0-65535 and scales these to the range 0.0-1.0. The format setting in the HistogramTransformation window or Statistics window does not affect the values you see on the PixInsight status bar when running your cursor over an image i.e. If you open the Statistics process then again you can change the way the values are reported within the Statistics window. In addition, the HistogramTransformation dialog allows you to change the way the values are reported within that window: The Readout Option window in the "Edit" pull down menu is just another way of doing the same thing. You can change the way these values are reported by hitting the indicated arrow on the status bar, which brings up a further menu: When you run the cursor over an image, the pixel values are reported on the status bar at the bottom of the PixInsight app: I don't know which parts of this you do or do not understand so apologies if I now explain things you already know. The main concern here is that I am using their script WeightedBatchPreprocessing to post-process my raws. However, I have used the "FlatContourPlot" script, and the "HistogramTransformation" process and they show low histogram counts. The other option is that maybe I am using incorrectly their tools. Now on the Pixinsight, version, I have the Core Version 1.8.8-12 Ripley (圆4). I tend to agree with you that probably RawDigger would be the correct one, as it is a product focused on that type of analysis, so I assume that their histogram would be correct. Newer versions of PixInsight use LibRaw instead of DCRaw and this fixes the problem. DCRaw had a known bug with some Sony cameras (including the A7S) which resulted in values being one quarter of what they should be, so you are seeing peaks of 2000 out of 4096. I think you are using an out-of-date version of PixInsight which uses DCRaw to read the raw files. This is not a problem for evaluating RAW data but is probably not ideal.Believe RawDigger. Of course, it is also possible to convert the compressed RAW image files to DNGs using Adobe's DNG Converter but the latter does not read the files quite correctly leaving a 16 pixel black line on the right side - apparently according to Alex the ActiveArea tag is incorrectly set by Adobe converter to full image instead of actual image area. completely white frame at same iso (30sec exposure, or several second exposure without lens)Īlex may be contacted at Alex Tutubalin ] completely black frame (lowest ISO, cap on lens, shortest shutter speed, aperture max closed) "If you have access to Fuji X-Pro2 camera, could you please make two shots in compressed file mode: Unfortunately, Fujifilm seem a little coy about releasing documentation to support this compressed format and it seems mostly unsupported with the exceptions of Adobe and Silkypix.Īlex from LibRaw - developer of RawDigger and FastRAWViewer - is keen to offer support for this Fujifilm compressed RAF format in these excellent tools and so he needs one of you kind new X-Pro2 owners to provide him with a couple of 'baseline' compressed RAW file images as follows: These are almost invariably uncompressed (~49MB) RAFs but kindly provided access to some compressed RAFs (this being a new option on the X-Pro2) on this thread:Īnd these are the first and only lossless compressed RAW image files I have seen from an X-Pro2 to date. There are a few RAW image files made available on the net and on this forum taken under ideal and not so ideal conditions/exposures at a range of ISOs. I am no expert on RAW data analysis but am keen to understand for myself if there is any substance in any of the comments and opinions expressed to date. SNR levels) in the X-Pro2 RAW files which seems to be dividing opinion about the performance of the new X-Trans III sensor. There is some informed (and not so well-informed) critical discussion around the traps about perceived 'higher than expected' noise levels (i.e.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |