[Digikam-users] Color management with Nikon d40x
gary.pajer at gmail.com
Sat Dec 13 21:46:57 CET 2008
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 1:03 PM, <junk at lexoncom.com> wrote:
> This is what I feel too.
> It looks like Nikon software tweaks the image by deafult and we dont have
> control over it (during raw conversion). Digicam does not do anything and
> I would say in some sense this is more professional aproach.
Is that right? Doesn't digiKam reset (at least) the black point and
white point? On my installation, the sliders in the "levels" menu
come up non-zero (and non-full-scale) by default. I suppose there
must be some way to control the default behavior ... but I'm new at
digiKam, and am still learning my way around.
> > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 11:56 AM, <junk at lexoncom.com> wrote:
>>> this explains everything, I thought that those thumnails were small.
>>> But , i tried to extrat one and it was 903K. Big enough to look very
>>> One more think, I am curious if Nikon software also displays JPEG as
>>> preview while editing or those are Raw images converted to working color
>>> space and then updated while editing?
>>> Now I understand algorithms used by nikon raw converter and digikam may
>>> differ and the final output will depend on how the users uses the
>>> software editing features. Initially I though that every software uses
>>> same raw conversion and the image would only differ depending on how it
>>> was altered during the editing. It also looks like that it is better to
>>> use original raw converters.
>> If "original" means "from the camera manufacturer", I think it's not
>> necessarily so. For example, there are different methods to map the
>> camera pixels to an image element (demosaicing) and none of the
>> methods can be said to be correct. They all have compromises, but
>> each has its own set of compromises. For most applications, for most
>> images, for most people, the differences don't matter at all. One
>> thing that has bitten me when trying a new raw converter is that some
>> of them automatically apply some exposure touch up. I'd prefer that
>> they didn't.
>>>> 2008/12/13 "Sveinn í Felli (IMAP)" <sveinki at nett.is>
>>>>> Following message from Elle Stone via Gerard Kulzer
>>>>> dated Tue, 13 May 2008 08:23:24 +0200
>>>>> seems to respond to your questions.
>>>>> Those thumbnails/lowresJPG's are made in the camera using
>>>>> closed proprietary algorythms.
>>>>> Sveinn í Felli
>>>> the image used to render _quickly_ thumbnails in digiKam is a small
>>>> image embeded in RAW and taken by camera during shot. It's not a full
>>>> resolution version, it's a reduced one generally used to render preview
>>>> TV or camera screen.
>>>> This JPEG image use all camera algorithms to render properlly
>>>> It's not the RAW image. In fact it have the same render than if you
>>>> take a
>>>> real JPEG image instead a RAW.
>>>> But you cannot compare RAW image data and JPEG image data : RAW do not
>>>> color space, JPEG is always in RGB color space.
>>>> Gilles Caulier
>>>> Digikam-users mailing list
>>>> Digikam-users at kde.org
>>> Digikam-users mailing list
>>> Digikam-users at kde.org
>> Digikam-users mailing list
>> Digikam-users at kde.org
> Digikam-users mailing list
> Digikam-users at kde.org
More information about the Digikam-users