Notices

Originally Posted by Estel

Thanks for answer, Nicolai. If I understand it correctly, raw imagedata is the same, no matter who pick it up (fCam or camera-ui). So, fCam creates .dng file (from mentioned raw imagedata) differently? It is even possible?

Originally Posted by Estel

Thanks for answer, Nicolai. If I understand it correctly, raw imagedata is the same, no matter who pick it up (fCam or camera-ui). So, fCam creates .dng file (from mentioned raw imagedata) differently? It is even possible?

Originally Posted by Estel

Furthermore, CornerFix is FOSS, so there is a chance that it's going to be ported to N900 (which, in tandem with ufRAW, supply us with whole 'photolab' on device).

Originally Posted by nicolai

The source of the raw image is the same (camera memory). But of course,
the image data itself depends on the capture settings (iso and
exposure time).
My camera-ui uses the stock camera driver settings, whereas fCam uses a wider/finer range of exposure settings.

Originally Posted by geohsia

Hi Nicolai. Do you think there is any way to address what looks to be compression on the dark side of the tone curve. Thx.

Originally Posted by nicolai

What tone curve?

What I'm convinced of is that what we have really isn't RAW. By that I mean something is goofy because when you take photos of a properly lit scene let's say a tree in the shadow, the shadow cutoff is so much more extreme on RAW. No matter how you kick up exposure, Brightrness and it is hard to recover data from the shadows.

If you look at the JPG you see detail there and it looks fine. Significantly more data. So what does that mean? As far as i'm concerned RAW on the N900 is really not that much better than JPG and in most cases JPG will give you a better file.

As for why your guess is as good as mine.

Originally Posted by tecs

I was going to check Estel's ISO problem when I found out my device didn't support 720p anymore (and I am pretty positive it did)...
I reinstalled everything 720p related + freemangordon's latest camera-ui2. His version is 1.1.29.2+0cssu7 and I had 1.1.29.2+0cssu8 (CSSU update replaced his version?). Reboot and it works again!

Back to Estel's problem: in both versions (0cssu7 and 0cssu8) manual ISO on both video and pictures does not black out the viewfinder and captured output is fine also.

Originally Posted by Estel

CSSU replaced version with cssu8 - You can replace it with cssu7, but You'll got "broken dependencies" errors, after trying to install anything. One way to get around it is pinning package in apt-get (can't do that in fapman). Other method is to unpack cssu7 version, change cssu7 to cssu8 in control file, and dpkg pack it again. I'm using this exact method. I was explained in this thread, if I remember correctly.
---

Thanks for checking my issue. Still, I have no idea, what may be causing it (I doubt tweaking control file does?).

// Edit

OK, I'm pretty sure there is some voodoo'ing involved, but I've checked it moment ago, and now it's working flawlessly (including viewfinder changing brightness in higher ISO). For few days - including yesterday - it wasn't working, and I was scratching my head about possible issue, until reporting here. I wasn't installing anything related (just Cleven-experimental) or messing with any settings in-between.

So, sorry for false alarm, but I have no idea what was causing that. I'm glad it works, anyway...

// Edit 2

Ok, it wasn't voodoo after all. This bug still exist - it manifest itself only, if one choose (+) exposure (via tool button) and manual ISO. On all (-) exposure everything is fine, but on any (+) exposure and manual ISO selection, screen goes 100% black and resulting photos are also 100% black.

// Edit 3

The resulting photos and viewfinder isn't 100% black - if I direct device into strong light source, I can actually barely see it (both in viewfinder and resulting photos). Then strange thing is that, it's same for every ISO settings - even 1600 one! And, as I've said, it's happening only on (+) exposure settings (for example, + 0.5, +1.0 etc)