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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 04:23 AM |