A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 5th 14, 08:21 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Jeffery Small
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?


I thought I would post this to the digital group to see if there were any
Minolta or Sony users who used the UFRaw converter software with their raw
image files. I have been having serious problems and wanted to see if this
was observed by others. Here is my story.

Ubuntu 13.10 system running on an Asus U56E system
UFRaw ver. 0.19.2
Dcraw ver. 9.19.1
GIMP ver. 2.8.6
Darktable ver. 1.2.3
Shotwell ver. 0.15.0

When attempting to load Minolta (mrw) and Sony (arw) raw image files into
GIMP, the UFRaw plug-in is not properly processing them. The following
webpage has images which demonstrate the problem:

http://smallthoughts.com/photos/misc/GIMP/index.html

The raw files are being imported with distorted color, exposure and
contrast. However, as the additional images show, other programs such as
Darktable and Shotwell and the Minolta/Sony editing programs (on Windows)
are importing and displaying these raw files properly.

Has anyone else been experiencing similar problems with their raw files of
any type?

Regards,
--
Jeff
  #2  
Old April 5th 14, 09:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

(Jeffery Small) wrote:
I thought I would post this to the digital group to see if there were any
Minolta or Sony users who used the UFRaw converter software with their raw
image files. I have been having serious problems and wanted to see if this
was observed by others. Here is my story.

Ubuntu 13.10 system running on an Asus U56E system
UFRaw ver. 0.19.2
Dcraw ver. 9.19.1
GIMP ver. 2.8.6
Darktable ver. 1.2.3
Shotwell ver. 0.15.0

When attempting to load Minolta (mrw) and Sony (arw) raw image files into
GIMP, the UFRaw plug-in is not properly processing them. The following
webpage has images which demonstrate the problem:

http://smallthoughts.com/photos/misc/GIMP/index.html

The raw files are being imported with distorted color, exposure and
contrast. However, as the additional images show, other programs such as
Darktable and Shotwell and the Minolta/Sony editing programs (on Windows)
are importing and displaying these raw files properly.

Has anyone else been experiencing similar problems with their raw files of
any type?


Typically UFRAW is configured to save the current
configuration as the default for the next image, which
means (with that option enabled) you must set all
configuration options each time UFRAW is started. Or
another way to put it, there is no standard set of
defaults that will always be somewhere close. If the
last image processed was way out in left field, the next
one will not even come close to looking right unless it
is also off into left field.

With the screen shots you are showing we can't tell
anything other than what "exposure" is set for. There
are two places where a gamma curve can be set, plus
slider options for gamma value and gamma linearity. (If
it is compiled in, you may also have a slider option for
"contrast".) Any of those, with odd defaults, might be
the cause of the way the RGB image is being produced.

There are a number of ways, if you need a standard
default configuration, to accomplish that.

You could configure UFRAW to have one preset default
configuration used for every image. Sounds good, but in
practice that will cost a huge amount of processing time
unless you actually do RAW conversions one at a time
(for example using UFRAW as a plugin to GIMP to
preprocess individual images).

The most efficient workflow is usually invoking UFRAW
interactively on a directory full of RAW files, and
writing only the "ID" file for each while using it
interactively. When finished with all of the RAW files
UFRAW is then invoked as a batch process to produce the
RGB output files (while you can then take a coffee break
or whatever).

At the beginning of the interactive session every
configuration option is set as desired, and the
configuration for each image is the default for the
next.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #3  
Old April 5th 14, 10:31 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

On 2014.04.05, 15:21 , Jeffery Small wrote:
I thought I would post this to the digital group to see if there were any
Minolta or Sony users who used the UFRaw converter software with their raw
image files. I have been having serious problems and wanted to see if this
was observed by others. Here is my story.

Ubuntu 13.10 system running on an Asus U56E system
UFRaw ver. 0.19.2
Dcraw ver. 9.19.1
GIMP ver. 2.8.6
Darktable ver. 1.2.3
Shotwell ver. 0.15.0

When attempting to load Minolta (mrw) and Sony (arw) raw image files into
GIMP, the UFRaw plug-in is not properly processing them. The following
webpage has images which demonstrate the problem:

http://smallthoughts.com/photos/misc/GIMP/index.html

The raw files are being imported with distorted color, exposure and
contrast. However, as the additional images show, other programs such as
Darktable and Shotwell and the Minolta/Sony editing programs (on Windows)
are importing and displaying these raw files properly.


I've kicked The Gimp off my system, but back when it was loaded I had no
issues loading raw files via UFRaw. (Sony a900). (Actually at some
point I had other issues with UFraw running at all - but fixed after
some fanagling - don't recall if that was under Linux or OS X).

The default (or however you have them) UFRaw settings might not be
"nominal" - so go over them one by one and attempt to find if any are
really way off. Set the channel multipliers to 1 (to begin),
temperature to 5000K (more or less) and so on. It may just be your
defaults are too wacky.

(I notice for example that the WB setting is "0" in your examples. Not
sure if that's a correct or useful WB value in The Gimp. Likewise your
channel multiplier values @ 4 and 2 in the 2nd/3rd examples may be quite
a way off - or not).

All that said, when you're serious about photography and raw you should
seriously get away from Linux and The Gimp.

--
Those who have reduced our privacy, whether they are state
or commercial actors, prefer that we do not reduce theirs.
- Jaron Lanier, Scientific American, 2013.11.

  #4  
Old April 5th 14, 11:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

Alan Browne wrote:

All that said, when you're serious about photography and raw you should
seriously get away from Linux and The Gimp.


That is certainly one alternative. But perhaps not the
best. Learning how to use Linux and GIMP might not be
possible for some people, but it can be a superior
choice for others.


--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #5  
Old April 6th 14, 12:24 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

All that said, when you're serious about photography and raw you should
seriously get away from Linux and The Gimp.


That is certainly one alternative. But perhaps not the
best.


it is if one wants better results with less hassle.

Learning how to use Linux and GIMP might not be
possible for some people, but it can be a superior
choice for others.


only for those not interested or incapable of using more capable
software.

had the original poster been using camera raw, he would not have had
any problems with minolta/sony or any other raw file, and he would also
benefit from a fully non-destructive workflow, something not possible
with the gimp/ufraw.
  #6  
Old April 6th 14, 12:32 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bob[_26_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:
[ ... ]
All that said, when you're serious about photography and raw you should
seriously get away from Linux and The Gimp.


Why would you write this?

Bob
  #7  
Old April 6th 14, 12:33 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 19:24:54 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

All that said, when you're serious about photography and raw you should
seriously get away from Linux and The Gimp.


That is certainly one alternative. But perhaps not the
best.


it is if one wants better results with less hassle.

Learning how to use Linux and GIMP might not be
possible for some people, but it can be a superior
choice for others.


only for those not interested or incapable of using more capable
software.

had the original poster been using camera raw, he would not have had
any problems with minolta/sony or any other raw file, and he would also
benefit from a fully non-destructive workflow, something not possible
with the gimp/ufraw.


Alternatively, he could have obtained the same benefits by using DxO.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #8  
Old April 6th 14, 12:40 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bob[_26_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

In article ,
nospam wrote:
[ ... ]
Learning how to use Linux and GIMP might not be
possible for some people, but it can be a superior
choice for others.


only for those not interested or incapable of using more capable
software.

had the original poster been using camera raw, he would not have had
any problems with minolta/sony or any other raw file, and he would also
benefit from a fully non-destructive workflow, something not possible
with the gimp/ufraw.


I'm confused. Are you saying *noone* can produce good
and efficient results with GIMP, or are you saying *you*
aren't able to use it effectively?

Bob
  #9  
Old April 6th 14, 01:05 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

On 2014.04.05, 19:32 , Bob wrote:
In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:
[ ... ]
All that said, when you're serious about photography and raw you should
seriously get away from Linux and The Gimp.


Why would you write this?


Short answer: it's the truth and perhaps helpful to the OP (if not in
the short term). Don't exclude the rest of the answer I gave him that
may also be of use to him.

Long answer:

I know an awful lot of photographers.

I know an awful lot of professional graphics artists.

I know an awful lot of computer programmers / computer "geeks".

I'm very experienced with many OS' (that predate Windows and OS X and
even Unix by a pretty long period). I'm very proficient in Windows
(well, perhaps less so these days) and OS X. I was moderately
proficient in Linux (of course I'm talking about maintaining systems,
command line use, etc.)

On a Venn diagram, there some is overlap between these worlds. And in
the world of photography the overwhelming choices of OS's are Windows
and OS X.

In the professional photography domain it's roughly an even split
between Windows and OS X.

In the professional graphics domain it's heavily weighted to OS X.
About 80 - 90%.

And absolutely NOWHERE (in my experience) are there professional (or
even advanced "amateurs") in photography that use Linux or The Gimp.

It's just not a common, useful platform because it is not supported by
the professional apps makers. Professionals in these domains don't geek
out over freeware and the "free software" movement; they get and pay for
the best applications available - and the best "plugins" and add ons and
extensions (what have you) for those applications. Don't forget that
these people have to communicate (photogs, editors, designers, writers,
printers ... the whole lot) ... the common exchanges are those files
created by the apps used by these companies and agencies. Linux may be
in their servers, but not on their desktops.

That is not to say that Linux/Gimp and other applications in the domain
cannot be used (or are not used), they are just rare in the professional
domains of photography and graphics.

So Linux/The Gimp is just not a good place to be if one is serious about
photography over being a computer geek/programmer.

As to Linux, its desktop environments (yes there are several) are
mediocre as desktop systems compared to OS X. They're probably mediocre
compared to Windows 7 (with which I have little experience but I beleive
to be one of the few that MS "got right").

I had hope of Linux being the Great One - and in those days I spit when
anyone mentioned Apple and MacIntosh and OS X.

But, when a) I found Linux to be all but useless as an "office" and
photography platform and b) MS released Vista and c) I needed a new
computer ... I abandoned all hope and bought an iMac.

My Motto has been, since then in early 2008: "OS X: What Linux wants to
be when it grows up."


[1]: Linux' strengths are in servers, database systems, embedded
systems, super-computing and other specific, somewhat narrowly scoped
areas.

Not desktop.

Sorry for the long reply, I didn't have time to compose a short one.

--
Those who have reduced our privacy, whether they are state
or commercial actors, prefer that we do not reduce theirs.
- Jaron Lanier, Scientific American, 2013.11.

  #10  
Old April 6th 14, 01:09 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

On 2014.04.05, 19:40 , Bob wrote:
In article ,
nospam wrote:
[ ... ]
Learning how to use Linux and GIMP might not be
possible for some people, but it can be a superior
choice for others.


only for those not interested or incapable of using more capable
software.

had the original poster been using camera raw, he would not have had
any problems with minolta/sony or any other raw file, and he would also
benefit from a fully non-destructive workflow, something not possible
with the gimp/ufraw.


I'm confused. Are you saying *noone* can produce good
and efficient results with GIMP, or are you saying *you*
aren't able to use it effectively?


I can't reply for nospam, but having attempted on several occasions to
use the Gimp for a photography workflow, it's many shortcomings v.
Photoshop came to the surface in a jiffy.

And as time goes on and the capability set of Photoshop increases more
quickly than the Gimp's poor record of catching up ... well...

One exercise, optimally sharpening (USM) a finished image, is but one of
many examples I can use to show that the Gimp is a poor user experience
for photographers. Yes - you can achieve the desired end for many
things - just not as quickly or efficiently as in PS. (and yes,
sufficient cherry picking will fine exceptions).

--
... it may be that "in the cloud" really isn't the best term
for the services these companies offer. What they really
want is to have us "on the leash."
-David Pogue, Scientific American, 2014.02
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A sad time for Sony/Minolta DSLR users Chris Malcolm[_2_] 35mm Photo Equipment 4 June 3rd 12 10:41 AM
A sad time for Sony/Minolta DSLR users Joe Kotroczo Digital Photography 0 May 31st 12 08:14 PM
A sad time for Sony/Minolta DSLR users Joe Kotroczo 35mm Photo Equipment 0 May 31st 12 08:14 PM
GIMP and UFraw jeff worsnop Digital Photography 8 December 8th 08 03:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.