|
2013-07-19
, 17:58
|
Posts: 3,074 |
Thanked: 12,960 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ Sofia,Bulgaria
|
#1012
|
|
2013-07-20
, 08:50
|
Posts: 78 |
Thanked: 84 times |
Joined on Aug 2012
|
#1013
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to independent For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2013-07-20
, 14:51
|
|
Posts: 215 |
Thanked: 448 times |
Joined on Aug 2012
@ Burgas, Bulgaria
|
#1014
|
Nope, the "best photo quality" we can achieve with camera-ui2 is by using "r" on keyboard, and saving them as RAW
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to tanago For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2013-07-20
, 17:55
|
|
Posts: 5,028 |
Thanked: 8,613 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#1015
|
Anyway, is there a way short of using FCAM and processing the images by hand of removing noise reduction altogether? I tried using the built-in JPEG codec (the jpegcodec instead of the dspjpegcodec) and it seems to make the noise reduction worse.
Tell me how the RAW capturing on N900 is any good for the average user? The need to fix the light center? The need of post-processing to achieve the needed result?
Dont answer those questions cuz there are no reasonable answers to them and please stop talking 'against' me, ty
The Following User Says Thank You to Estel For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2013-07-21
, 05:18
|
Posts: 78 |
Thanked: 84 times |
Joined on Aug 2012
|
#1016
|
The Following User Says Thank You to independent For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2013-07-21
, 07:05
|
|
Posts: 215 |
Thanked: 448 times |
Joined on Aug 2012
@ Burgas, Bulgaria
|
#1017
|
Stop asking question, if you're dead to answers, at the very point of asking. If it's meant only to boost your ego, you could save it for yourself.
Anyway, your logic is "astonishing" - average user doesn't need RAWs, but he need 3-5 MB JPEG files (change from 95% quality to 100% quality for JPEG), without *any* benefits perceivable by naked eye? Really?
I imagine *most* N900 users as something more than ego-monkeys, who doesn't know how to use RAW to get photos developed the way they like it - yet, like to have 10x bigger JPEGs just for sake of using more space and feeling "I'm more cool, I gotdisplay called retinasame quality photos that *must* be better, because they're bigger-sized jpeg's".
If you would do at least basic research (aka "read manual" ) before posting your "awesome" advices, you would realize, that setting JPEG quality to 100% is as brainless as it gets - it turns out all JPEG optimizations, at the expense of file size, without *any* real-world gains.
The Following User Says Thank You to tanago For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2013-07-21
, 07:51
|
|
Posts: 1,974 |
Thanked: 1,834 times |
Joined on Mar 2013
@ india
|
#1019
|
|
2013-07-21
, 15:40
|
Posts: 1,203 |
Thanked: 3,027 times |
Joined on Dec 2010
|
#1020
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Android_808 For This Useful Post: | ||
I can't find relevant TMO thread now, but just duckduckgo.com for "CornerFix", and you're home. I'm using it myself, and can confirm that it works for 100% - just like default Nokia raw developing. The best thing, is that it does is lossless'ly at RAW level - you put in a vignetted RAW, and get out another RAW, without vignette. Then, you can develop it whatever you want.
Only drawback is that, despite being FOSS it can't be compiled for N900 for some obscure reasons (I remember it vaguely - knowledgeable ones explained it in details, and it had something to do with it being written originally for Mac), so you need windoze or mac desktop for using it
---
I agree, though, that Nokia's automagic RAW developing algorithms are *very* good, in other parts too... It's pity, that they're (and always will be) closed source, as while doing it, Nokians have access to all data about camera module and lens characteristic. AFAIK, no one yet made effort to re-create perfect RAW developing template (for our camera characteristic) and share it with others. (BTW, no logical reason why Nokia is keeping it closed - it won't be useful for any other product, than 2 Nokia phones using this module type...).
As for me, the best I was able to get, were photos that have *some* aspects better than Nokia's photo (but others worse - easy to compare, if you instruct camera programs to save *both* RAW and jpg, at the same time). But, for doing so, I develop every photo by hand, focusing on aspects that I'm more interested in that particular photography.
---
/Estel
N900's aluminum backcover / body replacement
-
N900's HDMI-Out
-
Camera cover MOD
-
Measure battery's real capacity on-device
-
TrueCrypt 7.1 | ereswap | bnf
-
Hardware's mods research is costly. To support my work, please consider donating. Thank You!