DPP 3.7 for linux

<p>Exactly. So, when I finish with UFRaw I should proceed with GIMP?</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

 

<p>Yakim, you do seem to have the Gimp plugin. Use the standalone version. If you save your image as 16-bit tif, work with it in cinepaint since Gimp can only do 8-bit depth. Cinepaint is much more primitive, but will work with 16 bit tiffs. As far as WINE, you should automatically have the newest version as long as you keep your Ubuntu system uptodate.</p>

<p><!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } -->

<p >I apologize for my ignorance but what is the difference - in practical terms - between 16-bit and 8-bit? Also, I don't work with TIFF files. When I had the 1D its RAW files ended with .tiff but the RAW files of the 40D ends with .CR2.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Happy shooting,</p>

<p >Yakim.</p>

</p>

<p><em>Exactly. So, when I finish with UFRaw I should proceed with GIMP?</em><br>

I think yes.</p>

<p>JPEG uses 8 bits per colour channel resulting in 256 shades of red, green and blue.<br>

16bit TIFF uses 16 bits, corresponding to 65536 shades per colour channel.<br>

However, most camera sensors only generate 12 or 14 bits per pixel, so some of the 16bit bits are not used.<br>

The computer monitor will only display 8 bit colours, but the remaining bits are used by the computer to avoid loosing details when we apply filters and other image transformations.<br>

One of the big advantages of having more bits per channel is that it is possible to correct exposure, colour balance, apply gamma curves without loosing too much information.<br>

In this case, as most of these transformations (gamma curves, exposure and color correction, etc.) are performed inside UFraw using 16bit math, saving the output as a 16 bit image isn't so important, unless when we later want to apply many filters.</p>

 

<p>

<p dir="ltr">Apologies. I looked at Wikipedia but still can not understand how <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagged_Image_File_Format">TIFF</a> is related. I shoot RAW and convert to JPEG. Where does TIFF play a part here?</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>

 

<p>TIFF is just another image format: It supports both 8bit and 16bit per color channel images,<br /> as oposed to current JPEG implementations that only support 8 bit images (this might change in the future).</p>

<p>Some persons prefer to convert RAW to 16bit TIFF.<br /> They execute all post processing work (filters, sharpening, blur, etc.) using this 16 bit image and only convert the final image to JPEG as a final step in the end.</p>

<p>http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/raw.html</p>

 

<p>The lossless TIFF compression is a very interesting concept but how much space do you save by going from say, a 10MB RAW file?</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

 

<p>I just saved a fairly detailed TIF using LZW compression from a 10.5MB 1Ds raw file, and it ended up around 19.5MB. The same file using ZIP compression was 17.8MB.</p>

<p>

<p dir="ltr">I'll keep the RAW format then. I see no reason to transform them to TIFF.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>

 

<p>Another vote for <a href="http://www.rawtherapee.com/">RawTherapee</a> . Good processing, good interface and a lot of control. Don't be put off by the fact that most Canon images come up too dark with the default settings, just adjust the default processing parameters and that's solved. I use it on Windows but many are using it on Linux as well.</p>

<p>

<p dir="ltr">10X for the recommendation. I'll give it a try.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>

 

<p>Hello,<br>

If you are going to compare several programs, please let us know which one worked better.<br>

I tried several programs one year ago: at the time, I choose UFraw because it was much faster than the other programs (it uses all CPU cores in parallel - if you have a DualDuo or a QuadCore it's a lot faster) but things might have changed since then.<br>

Fernando</p>

 

<p>Fernando, the key to working fast with RawTherapee (that uses all my CPU's but I only have 2) is using a small preview window(1:4 or 1:5). That's more than adequate to see the effect of color and exposure adjustments. Then use the 'detail' window at 100% or more to check the effect of sharpening and noise reduction. It may not have been the case with you but many people set the preview to 1:1 and are disappointed with the speed.</p>