Active Topics
-
The N900 is now 15 years old! (9)
to Nokia N900 by Arno_11 - 1 hr, 12 mins ago -
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 5 days, 13 hrs ago - more...
| The Following User Says Thank You to ChakiShante For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-01-19
, 13:21
|
|
Posts: 75 |
Thanked: 41 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Suffolk, UK
|
#2
|
This would be an awesome app. an most definately something I'd use! I do a lot of live music photography and want to expand that when out on tour with bands to do micro blogging direct to a bands website with tour photos and a RAW application for when I can't easily use my DSLR would be great!
Just thought I'd add my support!
Just thought I'd add my support!
 |
|
2010-01-19
, 16:58
|
|
Posts: 2,050 |
Thanked: 1,425 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Bucharest
|
#3
|
While nothing to sneeze at, I agree, how much of a quality gain to you expect from the cam? I mean, considering the optics, sensor size, etc, not THAT much is lost in JPEG compression.
There's a reason everyone uses JPEG instead of ,say, PNG which is open and lossless. JPEG compresses better at much lower cost cor both compression and decompression. Compressing and writing a PNG could take many seconds.
Most RAW formats (except for uncompressed RAW) are compressed, if lossless. Uncompressed, an image from the camera is 15MB, that takes up to 8 seconds to write on a standard card.
Again, it's not like I don't want it, I'm simply raising a few questions for discussion. Not a developer on Linux, but a developer and an amateur photographer.
There's a reason everyone uses JPEG instead of ,say, PNG which is open and lossless. JPEG compresses better at much lower cost cor both compression and decompression. Compressing and writing a PNG could take many seconds.
Most RAW formats (except for uncompressed RAW) are compressed, if lossless. Uncompressed, an image from the camera is 15MB, that takes up to 8 seconds to write on a standard card.
Again, it's not like I don't want it, I'm simply raising a few questions for discussion. Not a developer on Linux, but a developer and an amateur photographer.
__________________
N900 dead and Nokia no longer replaces them. Thanks for all the fish.
Keep the forums clean: use "Thanks" button instead of the thank you post.
N900 dead and Nokia no longer replaces them. Thanks for all the fish.
Keep the forums clean: use "Thanks" button instead of the thank you post.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 17:03
|
|
Posts: 75 |
Thanked: 41 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Suffolk, UK
|
#4
|
That is a good point, my DSLR writes RAW files that are 23mb! Although this is very quick using a class6 memory card, it would probably be a nightmare on the n900! Hmmm 
 |
|
2010-01-19
, 17:08
|
|
Posts: 161 |
Thanked: 55 times |
Joined on Dec 2006
@ SLO, CA; United States
|
#5
|
Has anyone tried to change the various file types to be saved via the camera .config file? I have not, as I use my phone for work a good deal and don't want to brick it, and I am personally not sure which file types are supported. However; If it does .png, perhaps that is the next best alternative.(?)
__________________
Overworked, underpowered.
Overworked, underpowered.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 17:14
|
|
Posts: 5 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Paris, France
|
#6
|
I would actually argue that, precisely because of the somewhat limited sensor size, format, capabilities, and optics, we should do everything we can not to add JPEG compression artefacts on top.
Please note that this effort is also a good way for me of better understanding Linux/Maemo development, GStreamer, and OMAP3 drivers.
Please note that this effort is also a good way for me of better understanding Linux/Maemo development, GStreamer, and OMAP3 drivers.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 17:15
|
|
Posts: 356 |
Thanked: 172 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Canada
|
#7
|
Originally Posted by ndi
One big advantage of having access to the RAW output though is that you as the photographer get absolute control over any noise-reduction and sharpening that's applied, which can yield far superior results, IMO, especially in low-light situations.
While nothing to sneeze at, I agree, how much of a quality gain to you expect from the cam? I mean, considering the optics, sensor size, etc, not THAT much is lost in JPEG compression.
There's a reason everyone uses JPEG instead of ,say, PNG which is open and lossless. JPEG compresses better at much lower cost cor both compression and decompression. Compressing and writing a PNG could take many seconds.
Most RAW formats (except for uncompressed RAW) are compressed, if lossless. Uncompressed, an image from the camera is 15MB, that takes up to 8 seconds to write on a standard card.
Again, it's not like I don't want it, I'm simply raising a few questions for discussion. Not a developer on Linux, but a developer and an amateur photographer.
Professional DNR filters like Neat Image (esp. with a custom N900 profile) or Noise Ninja are always going to do a better job processing the image than the camera's internal software. Not to mention that its white-balaning leaves a bit to be desired..
I'm definitely be interested in seeing where this goes!
Last edited by Bingley Joe; 2010-01-19 at 17:18.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 17:17
|
|
Posts: 540 |
Thanked: 288 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#8
|
Originally Posted by ndi
AB (abbra) had a talk about this in the summit.
While nothing to sneeze at, I agree, how much of a quality gain to you expect from the cam? I mean, considering the optics, sensor size, etc, not THAT much is lost in JPEG compression.
(BTW: is there a way to ping people about threads on this forum software ?)
In short: if 10sec save times were acceptable you could get pictures of similar quality as high-end "prosumer" cameras (between the basic consumer cameras and DSLRs), can't remember about RAW offhand.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 17:22
|
|
Posts: 5 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Paris, France
|
#9
|
I did notice this talk but can't seem to find any related presentation material. If you happen to have it or where to find it ... I'm interested.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 17:25
|
|
Posts: 356 |
Thanked: 231 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#10
|
Originally Posted by ndi
Most JPEG engines are using primitive denoise techniques. By using RAW and taking complete control over this process you can create more eye-pleasing effects. This is especially important in cameras where matrix and optics are low-quality - and objectively N900 stuff is low quality comparing to other photo gear.
While nothing to sneeze at, I agree, how much of a quality gain to you expect from the cam? I mean, considering the optics, sensor size, etc, not THAT much is lost in JPEG compression.
IMO by average you can gain 1-2 EV with RAW processing.
I'm rather new to Linux development, but I am experienced in close-to-the-hardware development, particularly when it comes to TI platforms.
- is this functionality exposed yet in GStreamer (or any plug-in) ? I looked at camerabin and digicam but didn't find anything. Any relevant link appreciated.
- do I have to write a GStreamer plugin myself ? is this something that can be done at the user level or kernel level ?
- if I need to make a plug-in, I could somebody point me to how I could do that using ESBox ? there are not many links about how to use it to build GStreamer and plug-ins
- ideally, I'd prefer doing all this in python rather than C, is that possible at all ? Are camerabin and other plug-ins exposed through Python bindings ?
Thanks all.