Data saved by the F6

[Ian Rance]

<p>I was wondering if the F6 saves focused distance as part of the files you can export with the reader. I don't have the reader, but was wondering if I could use the date to run DXo or some other system to automatically correct for distortion and also allow me to adjust keysoning if needed.</p>

<p>At the moment I run Google Picassa, but DXo sounds nicer for what I want to do. The lens distortion correction tool would be great if I could use it!</p>

<p>Thanks, Ian</p>

[francisco_disilvestro]

<p>I'm not sure if the focused distance is saved but it won't help anyway with DxO automatic lens correction. DxO optic modules are specific for camera/lens combination, not just the lens (they include corrections for the AA filter) and there are no modules for film cameras.</p>

<p>Now, you can do manual correction of lens distortion in DxO for any image, but only for simple distortion (barrel or pincushion) the same as in recent versions of Photoshop. You will not be able to adjust complex distortion (wave or mustache)</p>

<p>A tool that can be used to correct for complex distortion is PTlens, but it may be difficult to determine the coefficients.</p>

<p>Also, if you want to correct distortion from a film image, make sure that the film is held perfectly flat when you scan it, since any "unflateness" will introduce distortion that will probably be impossible to correct.</p>

<p>Regarding keystoning, you can do it in DxO since it is done visually and does not depend on an optic module.</p>

<p>You can download a free trial of DxO and see if it meets your needs.</p>

[walterh]

<p>Just curious what DxO does for automatic lens correction where the AA filter comes in? The AA filter should not influence lens distortion or am I missing something? So is it CA correction? I could see an influence of the AA filter there. Sorry Ian if this detours the thread, I hope you do not mind.</p>

<p>Ian the solutions that Francisco mentioned seem fine for corrections that I apply so I wonder if you really need to go through the trouble to adjust using coefficients at different focus distance. If you do, then an exif editor might help (yes, even more work ) in case DxO accepts not just NEF files.</p>

[francisco_disilvestro]

<p>DxO corrects more than lens distortion (where AA will not have an infuence). It corrects also CA (the AA may influence here) and there is another function called "lens softness" (available only if you have a optic module) that corrects image "softness" of the camera and lens combination, and here is where I think the AA has an important influence. It is not USM based sharpening and the results are impressive. </p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>As Francisco pointed out, there are no DxO modules for any Nikon F6/lens combination. I am not quite certain as to why the DxO modules are camera specific - matter of fact is though that they are. And despite the fact that 1600 camera/lens combination sounds like a lot, there is more missing than actually available, there certainly are no MF lenses included. I also have not seen an option in DxO to read in a separate EXIF file - as would be the case for images shot with an F6 and then scanned by whatever means. I am sure a way can be found to construct a template skeleton and drop the scanned image into it - but that sounds like an awful lot of work. Setting completely aside the issue that scanned JPEGs don't give you much leeway to work with. PTLens certainly looks like a viable option for what Ian wants to achieve.</p>

[glenjo]

<p>I have the MV-1 reader which I use with my F100. The focus distance is not part of the data (for any camera - F6, F5 or F100). I'm working on a program which will take the camera data and merge it with the photo files as EXIF data.</p>

[glenjo]

<p>Here's a list of the data saved by an F6 in detailed mode:</p>

<p>

<p>"Film speed"<br>

"Film number",<br>

"Camera ID"<br>

"Frame number"<br>

"Shutter speed"<br>

"Aperture"<br>

"Focal length"<br>

"Lens maximum aperture"<br>

"Metering system"<br>

"Exposure mode"<br>

"Flash sync mode"<br>

"Exposure compensation value"<br>

"EV difference in Manual"<br>

"Flash exposure compensation value"<br>

"Speedlight setting"<br>

"Multiple exposure"<br>

"Lock"<br>

"Vibration Reduction"<br>

"Date(yy/mm/dd)"<br>

"Time"</p>

</p>

[Ian Rance]

<p>Thank you for the comments - all very interesting. Sounds like DxO is not what I need then - PTLens should be a help for what I need with luck.</p>

<p>The sort of distortion I was hoping to correct is like the attached pic.</p><div></div>

[francisco_disilvestro]

<p>I applied some quick manual corrections in DxO (I hope you don´t mind) to adjust for barrel distortion and keystoning</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[francisco_disilvestro]

<p>Now the corrections made entirely in PS CS3 with the lens correction filter</p>

<div></div>

[richard__]

<p><em>Glen: I'm working on a program which will take the camera data and merge it with the photo files</em></p>

<p>I did that recently myself too:<br /> <a href="http://www.henleygraphics.com/MVtoMeta.htm">MVtoMeta:: a csv file Reader, and MetaTag formatter for Nikon MV-1 film camera shooting data files</a></p>

<p><em><br /> </em></p>

[Ian Rance]

<p>Francisco - thanks for the demo. Those have straightened up nicely, and looking at the results I would say that PS CS3 has done the best job. I will ask about that at the shop too.</p>

[francisco_disilvestro]

<blockquote>

<p>looking at the results I would say that PS CS3 has done the best job</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ian, those are manual corrections done quickly, so I would not make any conclusion about which is better. Both tools allow for the same kind of corrections.<br /> Your image had a slight barrel distortion which is easy to correct. Both tools allow to superimpose a grid to the image used as a reference.<br>

Photoshop CS3 is not available anymore, now there is version CS4. It is much more expensive than DxO.<br>

If you are interested just in this kind of corrections, then <a href="http://epaperpress.com/ptlens/">PTlens</a> could be a choice at much lower cost.</p>

[fernando_scherer]

<p>dude you are trying to correct the roundness of Earth..</p>

[Ian Rance]

<p>Fernando, it is not like that in real life. There is no curve visible - I attach a photo taken in the same place with a fixed lens (less distortion).</p>

[Ian Rance]

<p>Photo did not attach...</p><div></div>

[francisco_disilvestro]

<blockquote>

<p>dude you are trying to correct the roundness of Earth..</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If that were the case, you would see pincushion distortion in the rest of the image</p>

[glenjo]

<p>Richard Henley, that's some NICE WORK. I'm using GTK+-2.0 and C on Linux, but also Phil's exiftool. I'll post the results soon.</p>

[ima_gine]

<p>Is there any Programm to read the Data direct from the F6 into PC?<br>

Something like <strong><strong>"SoftTALK 2000®" or " </strong> </strong> Camera Companion" for the F100.</p>