The Raspberry Pi RAWs should be identical to the RAW data dumps in the JPEG file.
Look for "BRCMo" (Hex: 42 52 43 4d 6f) in your files. Thats where my files start.
Unfortunatelly I can only produce RAWs for my real use case. Maybe I could put fake JPEGs in front?
I have also to contact the people from DeepSkyStaker. The program loads EXIF(JPEG) files at start concatenated w/ RAW but only uses the JPEG ...
It looks like I have 2 possible options:
1st: Fake JPEG data in front of the RAW data and and fix the bug in DeepSkyStacker
2nd: Enable LibRaw to read the pure RAWs (here a fork of dcraw which should be able to do this: https://github.com/6by9/dcraw) and ask for a DeepSkyStacker update with the new Libraw.
R-Pi files we have (and support in LibRaw) is EXIF(JPEG) files at start concatenated w/ RAW data dump.
Your dump looks entirely different. Do you have any format docs?
... Faust 1, Chapter 7, Mephistopheles to a student on the topic of medicine (the student believes), but actually about how to "deal with women" (what Mephistopheles actually says) ...
Oh yes absolutely so, I fully understand that! That's why I only issue a warning and allow the user to continue. It's more a case of did you recognise the camera or not!
> by the time you have completed the unpack() operation, does the LibRaw code know if the camera is/isn't supported
The philosophy is to try to support those cameras that are "not listed" too, even if the support is limited. In a lot of cases a file coming from a non-listed camera can be unpacked, but the support is limited. IsSupported implies yes or no as an answer. Grau, teurer Freund, ist alle Theorie, Und grün des Lebens goldner Baum.
Many thanks - probably better to use "Sony ILCE-7M2 / A7 II" no point in replicating the Sony word!
A thought just occurred to me - by the time you have completed the unpack() operation, does the LibRaw code know if the camera is/isn't supported. If it does know that, it would be simple to add a new function:
bool LibRaw::isSupported()
method that a client application can call after calling unpack() ...
Checking camera support against the list of names isn't going to provide a definitive "not supported" answer, because, for example, not all the camera aliases are known (for example, Leica C-Lux can have CAM-DC25 as a name in EXIF). We add such aliases as we discover them.
Unfortunately, we don't have a better solution at the moment, and it's not easy to come up with a one.
You are absolutely right re Sony, we will take care of this, thank you for your suggestion.
Thank you for the sample files (downloaded, you may remove them to clean up OneDrive space).
1st: we do not see green tint in our software that uses LibRaw for raw decoding and/or rendering (FastRawViewer, RawDigger). We do not know what specific version(s) of LibRaw is used in your apps and how app vendors use it (only for raw decoding, or also for rendering), so it is hard to help w/ this specific case.
2nd: Garbage at right edge of high-res image confirmed. We will adjust the size of sensor technological area to be cropped out in future LibRaw update (coming soon).
Thank you again for detailed problem report and for the RAWs.
Followup: the issue solved in current public snapshot via #if __cplusplus >= 201103L || (defined(_CPPLIB_VER) && _CPPLIB_VER >= 520) and/or LIBRAW_USE_AUTOPTR define
If you are willing to build it yourself, the edits are trivial to make it use std::unique_ptr instead.. Just replace the two std::auto_ptr instances in the libraw_datastream.h with std::unique_ptr (along with the export)
Then go into the CPP file and make sure that
a) every construction of the filebuf that formerly looked like this:
The Raspberry Pi RAWs should be identical to the RAW data dumps in the JPEG file.
Look for "BRCMo" (Hex: 42 52 43 4d 6f) in your files. Thats where my files start.
Unfortunatelly I can only produce RAWs for my real use case. Maybe I could put fake JPEGs in front?
I have also to contact the people from DeepSkyStaker. The program loads EXIF(JPEG) files at start concatenated w/ RAW but only uses the JPEG ...
It looks like I have 2 possible options:
1st: Fake JPEG data in front of the RAW data and and fix the bug in DeepSkyStacker
2nd: Enable LibRaw to read the pure RAWs (here a fork of dcraw which should be able to do this: https://github.com/6by9/dcraw) and ask for a DeepSkyStacker update with the new Libraw.
R-Pi files we have (and support in LibRaw) is EXIF(JPEG) files at start concatenated w/ RAW data dump.
Your dump looks entirely different. Do you have any format docs?
LibRaw is not about video files and/or (already) processed files.
LUMIX says:
HSP is a HDR format compressed with the HLG video technology.
HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) is a HDR format following (ITU-R BT.2100.
Supported in 201910 snapshot: https://www.libraw.org/news/libraw-snapshot-201910
Thanks.
Does not looks like something well-known.
Are you sure this is really RAW (mostly unprocessed) file?
http://www.lemkesoft.org/tmp/P1007511.HSP
Yes, we need sample files (BTW, LUMIX S 24-105/F4 looks like lens name, not camera name)
New snapshot is here: https://www.libraw.org/news/libraw-snapshot-201910
This Fall: not later, than Nov, 30.
the question is if the dates are still valid (the end of October?): the sooner we get the support the better
Also waiting for PANASONIC DC-S1/S1R. Hope it will be supported soon
Thanks, Iliah,
as a hint for others experiencing strange issues with DNG files: If you are using ImageMagick's compile of DCraw - that's the problem. It's broken.
Mact
... Faust 1, Chapter 7, Mephistopheles to a student on the topic of medicine (the student believes), but actually about how to "deal with women" (what Mephistopheles actually says) ...
Oh yes absolutely so, I fully understand that! That's why I only issue a warning and allow the user to continue. It's more a case of did you recognise the camera or not!
I love the (Goethe?) quote too!
> by the time you have completed the unpack() operation, does the LibRaw code know if the camera is/isn't supported
The philosophy is to try to support those cameras that are "not listed" too, even if the support is limited. In a lot of cases a file coming from a non-listed camera can be unpacked, but the support is limited. IsSupported implies yes or no as an answer. Grau, teurer Freund, ist alle Theorie, Und grün des Lebens goldner Baum.
Many thanks - probably better to use "Sony ILCE-7M2 / A7 II" no point in replicating the Sony word!
A thought just occurred to me - by the time you have completed the unpack() operation, does the LibRaw code know if the camera is/isn't supported. If it does know that, it would be simple to add a new function:
bool LibRaw::isSupported()
method that a client application can call after calling unpack() ...
Thanks again
David
Dear Sir:
Checking camera support against the list of names isn't going to provide a definitive "not supported" answer, because, for example, not all the camera aliases are known (for example, Leica C-Lux can have CAM-DC25 as a name in EXIF). We add such aliases as we discover them.
Unfortunately, we don't have a better solution at the moment, and it's not easy to come up with a one.
You are absolutely right re Sony, we will take care of this, thank you for your suggestion.
То be included in next snapshot.
I've answered to your E-mail message about GFX100 on Fri, 6 Sep 2019.
Please check your e-mail.
Hello, are there any news about Fuji GFX100?
(I guess, my letters got to a spam, so I'm duplicating my questions here).
Thank you for the sample files (downloaded, you may remove them to clean up OneDrive space).
1st: we do not see green tint in our software that uses LibRaw for raw decoding and/or rendering (FastRawViewer, RawDigger). We do not know what specific version(s) of LibRaw is used in your apps and how app vendors use it (only for raw decoding, or also for rendering), so it is hard to help w/ this specific case.
2nd: Garbage at right edge of high-res image confirmed. We will adjust the size of sensor technological area to be cropped out in future LibRaw update (coming soon).
Thank you again for detailed problem report and for the RAWs.
Followup: the issue solved in current public snapshot via #if __cplusplus >= 201103L || (defined(_CPPLIB_VER) && _CPPLIB_VER >= 520) and/or LIBRAW_USE_AUTOPTR define
What is minimal compiler/libstdc++/libc++ for that?
Will it compile on MacOS 10.6 using XCode 4.3 (for example)?
If you are willing to build it yourself, the edits are trivial to make it use std::unique_ptr instead.. Just replace the two std::auto_ptr instances in the libraw_datastream.h with std::unique_ptr (along with the export)
Then go into the CPP file and make sure that
a) every construction of the filebuf that formerly looked like this:
std::auto_ptr<std::filebuf> buf(new std::filebuf());Now looks like this:
auto buf = std::make_unique<std::filebuf>();Also, wrap each assignment of what used to be an auto-ptr with std::move. So, for example, this line:
f = saved_f;changes to this:
f = std::move(saved_f);Pages