ADOBE DNG CONVERTER BETA CODE

I created few weeks ago a new devel branch in git and updated the DNG sdk to last version, applied fix to compile and tried to use : it crash quickly.

ADOBE DNG CONVERTER BETA CODE

Code was not updated since 2012, and Adobe has released 2 new versions since this date. and search 'fuji' string to see all specificity to handle colors matrix and rotation of raw data.ģ/ The Adobe DNG sdk is too old. The way to play with Adobe SDK API is complex and of course code can be bugous. So perhaps the colors matrix need to be updated in libraw, simply.Ģ/ The DNG converter code as well. It's and old talk by mail, and it's difficult to get the right words to explain. I remember that lead libraw author report me that this matrix was deducted by reverse engineering using. Note : libraw is also used to extract the color matrix of the RAW data, which is different than all format. The RAw matrix is taken as well as a bytearray and passed to the Adobe SDK for encoding. For the DNG converter, there is no demosaicing stage. After all the Raw mosaic extraction is done with this lib. >Could it be an issue of the raw handler that is used? What is the big difference between Rawtherapee and digikam in >this sense? Thinking into a different direction: could it be that Rawtherapee demosaics the file before displaying it?ġ/ In libraw. Looking with diff, they are >hugely different.Ģ file format different, so 2 ouput differents. >I had a look with exiftool the output for an original S3Pro raw file and the converted DNG. You must test with this version which is the current development stage. No, digiKam appImage 7.0.0-beta3 use the lasted libraw version (beta not yet released). >Manually upgrading to current exiv2 0.27.2, brings no change in reading the metadata. As digikam appimage has all built in, that is irrelevant. >As an aside Ubuntu 18.04 has LibRaw 0.19.5 in the repository. Not he best way.Īnd RawTherapee use also a dedicated Raw engine. In this case we need to use a the closed source RAW to DNG converter. They even >more suggest going to DNG via Adobe DNG converter ( ) >Rawtherapee has no issues whatsoever with my DNG files (about 2700). Yes, darktable has own implementation of Raw demosaicing >I am unsure which raw lib they actually use at this time in the above link it reads 'darktable doesn’t use dcraw/libraw >and more.' Including Darktable that clearly suggests to use >DNG files. >Where does this leave us? So various apps 'have issues' with raw files. What relevance does exiv2 have for interpreting the raw/dng files? I'm trying to figure out where the glitch is most likely to be. Maik, you seem to hint that progress with exiv2 is 'slowish'. Unfortunately my coding days are long gone, so I'd be challenged to research into, how the 'logic' works here. Looking with diff, they are hugely different.Ĭould it be an issue of the raw handler that is used? What is the big difference between Rawtherapee and digikam in this sense? Thinking into a different direction: could it be that Rawtherapee demosaics the file before displaying it? I had a look with exiftool the output for an original S3Pro raw file and the converted DNG. Manually upgrading to current exiv2 0.27.2, brings no change in reading the metadata. They even more suggest going to DNG via Adobe DNG converter ( )Īs an aside Ubuntu 18.04 has LibRaw 0.19.5 in the repository. Rawtherapee has no issues whatsoever with my DNG files (about 2700). I am unsure which raw lib they actually use at this time in the above link it reads 'darktable doesn’t use dcraw/libraw and more.' Including Darktable that clearly suggests to use DNG files. Where does this leave us? So various apps 'have issues' with raw files.

Adobe dng converter beta