View Single Post
Posts: 1,378 | Thanked: 1,604 times | Joined on Jun 2010 @ Göteborg, Sweden
#132
Originally Posted by geohsia View Post
I wanted to verify. When I looked at the file in RAW Thjerapee the thumbnail looks like the JPG file but once you open the RAW file the thumbnail changes. I did a quick comparison between FCAM and Camera-ui2 and the output is nearly identical. Color might be slightly better on FCAM

Since FCAM already has the rawer RAW I would prefer to see a more processed RAW (closer to the JPEG output). Since Nokia understands the characteristics of the lens and sensor they produce a much more pleasing output. I think that is a better baseline for RAW editing (assuming we still have access to demosaic and NR)

NR is Noise Reduction. I prefer very heavy Chroma NR vs luminance. Chroma NR gets rid of the red and blue dots. Luminance gets rid of grain.
Ha ha! taking a shortcut often does not pay - after having tested the dng in rawtherapee originally, I made the comparisons based on what I saw using rawviewer on the n900. Your assessment is good news. So both fcamera and camera-ui2 raw have the vignetting, which perhaps is the most troublesome to correct? I would love to know Nokia's correction parameters.

thanks

PS: I wonder what then is the problem with the camera-ui2 dng for Lightroom? Remember that the fcamera devs had a problem with their dng at first and needed to tweak it.... Hmm, I wonder..

PPS: (off-topic) Darktable is another but new RAW developer http://darktable.sourceforge.net/about.shtml

PPPS: rawviewer on the n900 it seems, uses the embedded jpg.

Last edited by handaxe; 2011-03-18 at 19:56.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to handaxe For This Useful Post: