Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: KAP on June 21, 2007, 03:48:35 am
-
I'm using a 1DsmkII and Aperure at present. I use Aperture mostly for it' DAM capabilities, it supports Canon RAW files. I'm feeling the need for something like a P30+ but I don't know which if any DAM software supports a P30 or the Hasselblad equiv RAW files. I like Apertures vault system and general usability so I'm a bit shy about switching my workflow.
What are my choices for DAM and RAW support, I know the Leaf is Aperture supported but I here so many problems with the Leaf.
Any ideas,
Kevin.
-
I'm using a 1DsmkII and Aperure at present. I use Aperture mostly for it' DAM capabilities, it supports Canon RAW files. I'm feeling the need for something like a P30+ but I don't know which if any DAM software supports a P30 or the Hasselblad equiv RAW files. I like Apertures vault system and general usability so I'm a bit shy about switching my workflow.
What are my choices for DAM and RAW support, I know the Leaf is Aperture supported but I here so many problems with the Leaf.
Any ideas,
Kevin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124093\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, Leaf has had a lot of problems with their software. It still isn't perfect. On the other hand there are a number of possibilities to use Leaf files, ACR, PSCS3, Lightroom, Raw Developer (my personal favorite). Besides these they have now LC11 which is still slow but works well. RD will get a tethered solution for Leaf is the rumour.
These are all the raw developers I have tried over the last couple of years. I know there are some others as well but these I have not (yet) tried.
Personally I find the software thing a non-issue currently. Which doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.
-
Yes, Leaf has had a lot of problems with their software. It still isn't perfect. On the other hand there are a number of possibilities to use Leaf files, ACR, PSCS3, Lightroom, Raw Developer (my personal favorite). Besides these they have now LC11 which is still slow but works well. RD will get a tethered solution for Leaf is the rumour.
These are all the raw developers I have tried over the last couple of years. I know there are some others as well but these I have not (yet) tried.
Personally I find the software thing a non-issue currently. Which doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124105\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's the DAM side of things I'm most interested in, I need to archive the raws like I do in Aperture and search and find via keywords, title or date. There's lots of stuff that will develope a RAW from a Phaseone to produce a tiff or jpg. I spend a lot of my time doing library searches, Aperture has been a God send for this. Is there anything I can do this with a Phaseone or Imacon/Hasselblad?
A Phaseone looks favourite because of it's reliability record.
Thanks,
Kevin.
-
It's the DAM side of things I'm most interested in, I need to archive the raws like I do in Aperture and search and find via keywords, title or date. There's lots of stuff that will develope a RAW from a Phaseone to produce a tiff or jpg. I spend a lot of my time doing library searches, Aperture has been a God send for this. Is there anything I can do this with a Phaseone or Imacon/Hasselblad?
A Phaseone looks favourite because of it's reliability record.
Thanks,
Kevin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124109\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not sure what DAM means but I guess something like Digital Archive Manager?? I use Lightroom for this. Not perfect but for my use at the moment adequate with some workarounds.
I have tried several other applications, like Extensis Portfolio Server and have had a look at Fotostation Server. Sofar I have not found anything that is really perfect.
I would like to have something that can build an archive from files stored on a network drive. Have the thumbs locally and files over TCP/IP connection. Besides that I also would like to make collections that are immediately posted in a web environment with access control. Currently I have not found anything mainstream (out of the box) that can do just that.
My company (which I sold some 10 years ago) made the proto for a system that is currently in use by a photo agency (Hollandse Hoogte), this comes close but it doesn't support RAW (at least our version didn't) and is too large scale for my needs. Besides custom built stuff I have not found anything.
Anyone?
-
Not sure what DAM means but I guess something like Digital Archive Manager?? I use Lightroom for this. Not perfect but for my use at the moment adequate with some workarounds.
I have tried several other applications, like Extensis Portfolio Server and have had a look at Photostation Server. Sofar I have not found anything that is really perfect.
I would like to have something that can build an archive from files stored on a network drive. Have the thumbs locally and files over TCP/IP connection. Besides that I also would like to make collections that are immediately posted in a web environment with access control. Currently I have not found anything mainstream (out of the box) that can do just that.
My company (which I sold some 10 years ago) made the proto for a system that is currently in use by a photo agency (Hollandse Hoogte), this comes close to it but it doesn't support RAW (at least our version didn't) and is too large scale for my needs. Besides custom built stuff I have not find anything.
Anyone?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124112\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's about it. I've tried lots and bought a few (I bought Fotostation, what a mess), Aperture hits most of my nails on the head, there is lots of room for improvement.
Aperture supports Leaf but not Phaseone, does Lightroom support Phaseone RAW files?
Aperture has saved me hours of work, I'm not wanting to give all that up, saving the RAWs as 16bit tiff and importing into Aperture is an option but a slow and space hogging one.
Kevin.
-
That's about it. I've tried lots and bought a few (I bought Fotostation, what a mess), Aperture hits most of my nails on the head, there is lots of room for improvement.
Aperture supports Leaf but not Phaseone, does Lightroom support Phaseone RAW files?
Aperture has saved me hours of work, I'm not wanting to give all that up, saving the RAWs as 16bit tiff and importing into Aperture is an option but a slow and space hogging one.
Kevin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124116\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not sure Lightroom supports PhaseOne Raw files. I believe it does the P30 but not the +'s files, again not sure. However Lightroom does get its Raw handling capabilities from ACR so whenever that has support for it, Lightroom will have so as well. I am quite sure Adobe will continue to support Phase files (even when I have no inside information in Adobe).
Now, I remember the Fotostation server app. was called FotoWeb. In theory it could do a lot but it was extremely expensive and did not give me the feeling it would be something I could work with.
-
Not sure what DAM means
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124112\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Digital Asset Management
Kevin,
You can download and try Lightroom free for 30 days. Lightroom does support raw files from a number of digital backs (including Phase P45). The upcoming 1.1 update will apparently handlle the Phase + series backs (based on the assumption it will incorporate Adobe Camera Raw 4.1, which processes + files).
I own both Aperture and Lightroom and do prefer LR, although I do not do as much querying as it sounds like you do. Lightroom has similar DAM querying and flltering capabilities. It's worth taking a look at.
Brad
Update #2 - ACR 4.1 works with P45+ files, but not with P30+ raw files. No idea about other + backs. If this is an issue for you, it is probably best to test your back's raw files with ACR first. Hope that helps.
-
Thanks for the clarification for DAM Brad
That makes sense.
-
Lightroom does support but with some issues. I use it for my Canon files but for the Phase I use C1 @ the moment, Every now and then I use it but it ends up screwing up a file. Sometimes a line down the middle, sometimes a line off to the side halfway through just weird stuff all the time with Phase Files.
I had a similar problem with Raw Developer, emailed Brian and he gave me an FTP sit to load up some phase files. I don't think anyone at Adobe is willing to do that and get back to you. They are such the 800lb gorilla that we don't expect that kind of support. But as Pro consumers we should expect some knd of pro email support where are questions are answered. Have it Pro login only or some one kind of access where you can filter the audience.
I think it would be amazingly beneficial for Adobe to have Pro's upload countless files from ever back manufacturer with a description of the problem.
As far as backs go. Leaf has stepped up to the plate with LC11 and it really is processing the files well and not crashing or giving me error messages. PhaseOne is bullet proof no issues there, unless you use RD or LR you may expereince some hiccups.
Hassy is also bullet proof with Flexcolor and there are few little software issues but it is more the learning curve. Unless you are using older backs most of the new 22,31,39mp backs are great. I have not personally used the 31mp Hassy, but the 22 and 39 work great!
-
LR supports phase raw files....not the + files yet....ACR/bridge/PS supports phase files....
i am having problems with my 800iso files in LR, it does not read the back calibration files correctly, so i get a line right through the frame (2 seperate halves) very annoying....it does not show at 100....adobe is working on it....i was told yesterday but thomas knoll yesteerday that this issue will be solved in ACR 4.2....i heard elsewhere that 4.2 will also support P+ files....phase is now(finally) open with adobe and adobe is really making an efford....
i looooove LR, wish i would like aperture (i have always been all apple), but there are some things that just don't seem right and the upgrading seems slow....that and the fact that they don't provide support for Dbacks....it seems like this is the only apple app that is a little behind....
LR is great and i am positive that the issues will be resolved within the next couple of months....it is by far the best workflow solution out there.....saves me so much time it is a joke....
shooting tethered with C1 into LR works like a charm....i use LR 95% and C1 the rest...really only for processing the high iso files for final output....
-
I hadn't heard that LR 1.1 won't handle Phase + files. Has this been specifically confirmed by Adobe?
but even the upcoming 1.1 update will apparently not handlle the Phase + series backs.
Brad
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124149\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I hadn't heard that LR 1.1 won't handle Phase + files. Has this been specifically confirmed by Adobe?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124203\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks everyone, it looks like I will need to go the lightroom route if I want to use the Phaseone. I wish Apple would pull their finger out on Aperture and supported formats. I'm well into Aperture's workflow and it works fantasticaly for me. Leaf would be the obvious choice, but you hear so many bad stories, I can't afford the time for lock outs, I'm often in a helicopter and time is money.
Kevin.
-
Thanks everyone, it looks like I will need to go the lightroom route if I want to use the Phaseone. I wish Apple would pull their finger out on Aperture and supported formats. I'm well into Aperture's workflow and it works fantasticaly for me. Leaf would be the obvious choice, but you hear so many bad stories, I can't afford the time for lock outs, I'm often in a helicopter and time is money.
Kevin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124221\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Maybe you should try the Leaf as well. I have owned several the last couple of years. I have never experienced real problems, these backs have always been very stable. (not talking software)
Anyway. If the Phase suits you most. By all means go for it (I almost bought one). Just try the Leaf as well if you get the chance. Actually test as many as you can. All IMHO of course.
My first entrance into the world of MFDB's were second hand backs, so I had no options and just had to make work what I bought
Buying my first back new I would definitely see for myself how it performs, actually I have the tendency to just try everything myself
-
Thanks everyone, it looks like I will need to go the lightroom route if I want to use the Phaseone. I wish Apple would pull their finger out on Aperture and supported formats. I'm well into Aperture's workflow and it works fantasticaly for me. Leaf would be the obvious choice, but you hear so many bad stories, I can't afford the time for lock outs, I'm often in a helicopter and time is money.
Kevin,
Are you planning on using any type of gyro stabilizers with the medium format in your helicopter work?
-
FWIW, I have several respectable customers from both commercial and public/ government sectors who use Leaf backs on air-planes and helicopters with no such "so many bad stories" at all.
Actually, I have several ones who DON'T use it on helicopters and also don't have any "bad stories" to tell...
Internet, for most part is a fantastic place for sharing experiences and advice, but I would not suggest basing one's purchase decision or bad stories heard on the internet...this does not do justice to the product nor to the decision maker.
Kevin, please accept it as a constructive feedback not as patronising, really. Any query or need for further info, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Good luck and welcome into the world of MF digital.
Yair
-
My bad--sorry for the misinformation (from reading postings online).
I have Adobe Camera Raw 4.1 (for PSCS3) and it does seem to be reading P45+ raw files just fine.
I read that Lightroom 1.1 will be incorporating ACR1.1's technology, if that is true, LR 1.1 should work with + files as well.
I'll edit my original posting so as not to spread incorrect information.
Thanks William (I'll test before I post next time ),
Brad
I hadn't heard that LR 1.1 won't handle Phase + files. Has this been specifically confirmed by Adobe?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124203\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Thanks everyone, it looks like I will need to go the lightroom route if I want to use the Phaseone. I wish Apple would pull their finger out on Aperture and supported formats. I'm well into Aperture's workflow and it works fantasticaly for me. Leaf would be the obvious choice, but you hear so many bad stories, I can't afford the time for lock outs, I'm often in a helicopter and time is money.
Kevin,
Are you planning on using any type of gyro stabilizers with the medium format in your helicopter work?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124232\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes I do have a gyro, I only use it when light is getting low, it makes getting portrait shots difficult being so heavy to turn on the side. Do you se a problem with MF backs and a gyro?
Kevin.
-
FWIW, I have several respectable customers from both commercial and public/ government sectors who use Leaf backs on air-planes and helicopters with no such "so many bad stories" at all.
Actually, I have several ones who DON'T use it on helicopters and also don't have any "bad stories" to tell...
Internet, for most part is a fantastic place for sharing experiences and advice, but I would not suggest basing one's purchase decision or bad stories heard on the internet...this does not do justice to the product nor to the decision maker.
Kevin, please accept it as a constructive feedback not as patronising, really. Any query or need for further info, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Good luck and welcome into the world of MF digital.
Yair
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124238\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I shoot aerials all the time. I've used a P30 (with the Mamiya 645 ADD II system) in the air and always use a Gyro - either a KS-4 or KS-6.
No problems. Remember, a turbine helicopter is a thousand pieces of metal trying to shake itself apart. For me, a gyro is essential. I've used one for all of my career and can not imagine trying to shoot an aerial without one.
Two weeks ago, I shot an aerial story in New England on MF and had to slow down quite a bit. It made me pace myself much differently than with the Canon kit. Yes, I got stellar files- - I lost a few frames due to the back not clearing the buffer. Something you need to be aware of - not a deal breaker but you should think about it when shooting quickly.
I've done some testing for Apple with Aperture, while they won't say what cameras they do or do not plan to support in Aperture, they have said that the request for Phase support is pretty strong. (I asked about it for myself) The new camera support comes through upgrades to the OS. Earlier this week, the new update included support for the Leica M8, which was needed. I expect that Apple will support the Phase back within a few months.
Capture One is a stellar program, you could always process in Capture One or Brian Griffith's incredible - RAW DEVELOPER or even Lightroom - and then do your archive work in Aperture if you choose. Yair knows everybody and I remember him telling me about quite a few shooters shooting air-to-air or aerials with the Leaf back. I think MF digital is fine in the air as long as you are not shooting super fast.
-
very interesting.
with which shutter speeds you can work with a gyro?
i did several aerial shootings with helicopter without gyro, never had any problem but ofcourse ineeded shutter speeds of 1/500 which means good weather and then f4 - f 5,6. have shot as well with contax 645 and sinar m. the resolution of mf digital aerials is amazing.
-
very interesting.
with which shutter speeds you can work with a gyro?
i did several aerial shootings with helicopter without gyro, never had any problem but ofcourse ineeded shutter speeds of 1/500 which means good weather and then f4 - f 5,6. have shot as well with contax 645 and sinar m. the resolution of mf digital aerials is amazing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124324\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I shoot the lowest ISO I can use, often in the 125th/250th range - but I am shooting close to the ground and often subjects that are moving. I shoot almost always wide-open or close to it.
-
I shoot the lowest ISO I can use, often in the 125th/250th range - but I am shooting close to the ground and often subjects that are moving. I shoot almost always wide-open or close to it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124326\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
which difference between the ks4 and the ks6? is there any secondhand market for gyros?
-
Digital Asset Management
Kevin,
You can download and try Lightroom free for 30 days. Lightroom does support raw files from a number of digital backs (including Phase P45). The upcoming 1.1 update will apparently handlle the Phase + series backs (based on the assumption it will incorporate Adobe Camera Raw 4.1, which processes + files).
I own both Aperture and Lightroom and do prefer LR, although I do not do as much querying as it sounds like you do. Lightroom has similar DAM querying and flltering capabilities. It's worth taking a look at.
Brad
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124149\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm finding that PS CS3 / ACR4.1 only sees the thumbnail from my P30+ files, is there a way round this?
Steve
-
which difference between the ks4 and the ks6? is there any secondhand market for gyros?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=124327\")
[a href=\"http://www.ken-lab.com/]Ken Lab Gyro's - web page[/url]
http://www.ken-lab.com/ (http://www.ken-lab.com/)
Look on ebay. I would not buy a used one. They are not that expensive and their have been enough changes made to them over the years in battery, design and if one was dropped you would not know it until too late.
Ken-Lab is a fantastic company. You could rent one from them with no problem.
CD
-
Your experiences agree with what I had been reading about ACR 4.1, but after William asked me to double-check on my posting, I tried it myself to be sure.
I was able to pull up previews of several P45+ raw files in Bridge CS3, and was able to develop one at full resolution into Photoshop.
Just tried again and it is working fine. The loupe function works in Bridge and ACR recognizes it and develops it properly. I didn't do anything special.
Not that I think this would matter but I'm on PS CS3 Extended on OS X 10.4.10.
I wonder if they put in support for some + models but not others? If your P30+ files are still not working for you, you c an e-mail me one and I'll try it on my system. Unfortunately I don't have any P30+ raw files to try.
-Brad
I'm finding that PS CS3 / ACR4.1 only sees the thumbnail from my P30+ files, is there a way round this?
Steve
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124334\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Your experiences agree with what I had been reading about ACR 4.1, but after William asked me to double-check on my posting, I tried it myself to be sure.
I was able to pull up previews of several P45+ raw files in Bridge CS3, and was able to develop one at full resolution into Photoshop.
Just tried again and it is working fine. The loupe function works in Bridge and ACR recognizes it and develops it properly. I didn't do anything special.
Not that I think this would matter but I'm on PS CS3 Extended on OS X 10.4.10.
I wonder if they put in support for some + models but not others? If your P30+ files are still not working for you, you c an e-mail me one and I'll try it on my system. Unfortunately I don't have any P30+ raw files to try.
-Brad
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124354\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Brad, you have mail. I'm on PC, not mac.
-
Same here: in Bridge/PS CS 3/ACR 4.1/Lightroom, it will only see the small thumbnails from my P30+ files. So if it's reading Brad's P45+ files fine, it must not support all the Plus backs (or at least, the P30+) yet.
I'm finding that PS CS3 / ACR4.1 only sees the thumbnail from my P30+ files, is there a way round this?
Steve
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124334\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Do stabilised lenses eg. Canon deal with the vibration ?
Edmund
Ken Lab Gyro's - web page (http://www.ken-lab.com/)
http://www.ken-lab.com/ (http://www.ken-lab.com/)
Look on ebay. I would not buy a used one. They are not that expensive and their have been enough changes made to them over the years in battery, design and if one was dropped you would not know it until too late.
Ken-Lab is a fantastic company. You could rent one from them with no problem.
CD
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124351\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Do stabilised lenses eg. Canon deal with the vibration ?
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124368\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
IS lenses IF used with a GYRO will induce vertigo - it is one or the other (for most people)
IS/VR is the Volkswagen compared to the Ferrari.
-
Steve sent me a P30+ raw file and I'm seeing the same thing as others--it's not recognized in ACR 4.1.
Sorry to say, there is a different level of support for some + backs versus others (in this case P45+ vs. P30+)...
Thanks Steve--I couldn't figure out the discrepancy between what I'd been reading and my own experience with the P45+ raw files.
Best regards,
Brad
Same here: in Bridge/PS CS 3/ACR 4.1/Lightroom, it will only see the small thumbnails from my P30+ files. So if it's reading Brad's P45+ files fine, it must not support all the Plus backs (or at least, the P30+) yet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124365\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Thanks for trying Brad, that's useful to know. C1 it is then!
Steve sent me a P30+ raw file and I'm seeing the same thing as others--it's not recognized in ACR 4.1.
Sorry to say, there is a different level of support for some + backs versus others (in this case P45+ vs. P30+)...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124417\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
IS lenses IF used with a GYRO will induce vertigo - it is one or the other (for most people)
IS/VR is the Volkswagen compared to the Ferrari.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124391\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've used a a gyro with IS lenses with no problem.
Kevin.
-
Do stabilised lenses eg. Canon deal with the vibration ?
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124368\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I use a 70-200mm L IS Canon lens, you often see it sought of lock on the subject. I wouldn't get to concerned about the vibes in a helicopter, a decent shutter speed does the trick mostly.
That I find is the problem with 35mm based systems you need to stop down more to get the lens to perform. When I shot MF film, I would happily shoot wide open if I needed to. MF I always shot at 100 iso, now with the 1DsmkII I find I'm using 400iso a lot of the time.
Kevin.
-
which difference between the ks4 and the ks6? is there any secondhand market for gyros?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124327\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Bigger heavier more effective the higher the number. I use the biggest they make, I can't see how you would ever have to much. For video or movie work they have a special mount with gyros on each axis, it takes half a day to rig the Helicopter with these. I've got a 5x4 arriving soon, I'll ue the gyro on that all the time for aerials.
Kevin.
-
I hadn't heard that LR 1.1 won't handle Phase + files. Has this been specifically confirmed by Adobe?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124203\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi there.
I have a P45+, and just downloaded the update for Lightroom v1.1 and at least over here, it still doesn´t read the P45+ files. Sadly.
John
-
Here is an update on what I've found so far with + support and Adobe Camera Raw.
There has been some confusion around whether or not + files work in ACR, as some have reported success (myself included, with some files), while most are reporting ACR does not recognize these files. It turns out that the culprit seems to be in the way these files are written.
Phase raw files are based on a standard which supports two different ways of packaging the information, one known as 'big-endian' and the other 'little-endian'. I won't bore anyone with the geeky details but so far I am seeing 100% correlation between big-endian P45+ files and success using ACR and little-endian P45+ files and failure using ACR.
(It gets a bit more technical from here on...)
I have received P45+ files from three different sources (as I do not yet have one myself), and the only files which develop properly in PSCS3 ACR 4.1 and LR 1.1 are, in fact big-endian (Motorola byte order) P45+ files.
I have little-endian (Intel byte order) P45+ files which the providers were careful to point out were shot to a CF card in the back itself.
This tells me that the big-endian TIFF files must have been shot tethered, as I would assume that all P45+ backs would write using the same byte order.
I cannot assume that ALL big-endian P45+ files will work, nor can I assume that all little-endian P45+ won't--I simply don't have enough files. I would need to take a look at P45+ files that have been shot tethered to a Mac (PowerPC and Intel) and to a PC to see what the correlation is to byte order and compatibility with the current version of ACR.
If I could find a counter example (eg. a big-endian file that ACR does NOT recognize or a little-endian file that ACR DOES recognize) I may be able to devise a simple patch to allow these files to work until a version of ACR comes out with proper support for these files.
Please let me know if you have the means to provide these files. You can recognize a big-endian file because the first byte value of the file will be 77 (4D.H) and a little-endian file's first byte will be 73 (49.H).
And keep your fingers crossed that ACR 4.2 will come out soon and support these files--I think we'd all much rather be out shooting than reading posts like this one, fighting to keep our workflows... (I know I would.)
I hope that helps shed a little light on this mystery of some + files working with ACR and others not.
Best regards,
Brad
-
Bradley, are these Tiff-structured files ?
Edmund
Here is an update on what I've found so far with + support and Adobe Camera Raw.
There has been some confusion around whether or not + files work in ACR, as some have reported success (myself included, with some files), while most are reporting ACR does not recognize these files. It turns out that the culprit seems to be in the way these files are written.
Phase raw files are based on a standard which supports two different ways of packaging the information, one known as 'big-endian' and the other 'little-endian'. I won't bore anyone with the geeky details but so far I am seeing 100% correlation between big-endian P45+ files and success using ACR and little-endian P45+ files and failure using ACR.
(It gets a bit more technical from here on...)
I have received P45+ files from three different sources (as I do not yet have one myself), and the only files which develop properly in PSCS3 ACR 4.1 and LR 1.1 are, in fact big-endian (Motorola byte order) P45+ files.
I have little-endian (Intel byte order) P45+ files which the providers were careful to point out were shot to a CF card in the back itself.
This tells me that the big-endian TIFF files must have been shot tethered, as I would assume that all P45+ backs would write using the same byte order.
I cannot assume that ALL big-endian P45+ files will work, nor can I assume that all little-endian P45+ won't--I simply don't have enough files. I would need to take a look at P45+ files that have been shot tethered to a Mac (PowerPC and Intel) and to a PC to see what the correlation is to byte order and compatibility with the current version of ACR.
If I could find a counter example (eg. a big-endian file that ACR does NOT recognize or a little-endian file that ACR DOES recognize) I may be able to devise a simple patch to allow these files to work until a version of ACR comes out with proper support for these files.
Please let me know if you have the means to provide these files. You can recognize a big-endian file because the first byte value of the file will be 77 (4D.H) and a little-endian file's first byte will be 73 (49.H).
And keep your fingers crossed that ACR 4.2 will come out soon and support these files--I think we'd all much rather be out shooting than reading posts like this one, fighting to keep our workflows... (I know I would.)
I hope that helps shed a little light on this mystery of some + files working with ACR and others not.
Best regards,
Brad
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135717\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
You can recognize a big-endian file because the first byte value of the file will be 77 (4D.H) and a little-endian file's first byte will be 73 (49.H).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135717\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Less ambiguously, the first two bytes of a big-endian (so-called "Motorola architecture") TIFF are 0x4d4d (or "MM" in ASCII), and of a little-endian ("Intel architecture") TIFF, 0x4949 ("II").
The simplest immediate workaround would, indeed, be to rewrite the little-endian files to big-endian ones. This could be easily generalized, for batch processing, with a shell script that invoked tiffcp with the -B and/or -f options. The proviso is that Phase One private tags might cause tiffcp to fail.
I apologize that I can't quickly test this--I'm momentarily without Mac access, working on a bunch of semi-ancient Suns for the next week or so.
Thanks, Brad, for making the discovery!
-H.
-
(I bought Fotostation, what a mess)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124116\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I bought Fotostation as well, and can only agree with you. Advice to all who consider it is: stay away unless you are in newspaper publishing/media and have to use it for your (jeeez) prebaked .jpg images. RAW is out of the question with Fotostation as it is now.
Also:
Tried Aperture, better than Lightroom on many points, but does not eat my filetypes (specifically .dng's exported from flexcolor). Lightroom is the favourite in my book so far, but I loose my lovely DAC functions if I go that route, and am thus far forced to save both .fff and .dng raw files for a nice quick workflow with all software functions intact if I should need them.
If you have CS3, you could always stick with Bridge, its good enough if you know how to make scripts and actions, as well as keep a tidy filestructure on you harddrive.
-
Bradley, are these Tiff-structured files ?
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135723\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi, Edmund,
Yes, they are. I believe they may be TIFF/EP, but I haven't verified this.
--
Harris,
I had a similar thought, but was unaware of what utilities might do this. Thank you for the suggestion!
Mac OS X does not appear to have tiffcp, but does have tiffutil.
I think there's a small chance that patching could provide a short-term solution. In terms of converting endianness (is that even a word?), you are right--any Phase One private tags are going to rain on that parade.
I'll be sure to let you know if I manage to find any sort of a workaround for this.
Thanks again for the tip! We just might find a solution after all.
Kind regards,
Brad
-
discussion like this is what made me become a photographer in the first place:)
all this is so way over my head....i am really hoping for LR1.2 soon....there are some issues 9other then phase compatibility) that need to be resolved.......
and how come bridge has the loupe and LR does not?
-
Sorry for all the technical talk! I had hoped it would lead to something fruitful.
A quick (English) update for folks on this thread:
I have looked at the files that the P45+ back is writing and found a minor deviation from a strict interpretation of how these files are supposed to be written. I manually adjusted the file to correct for this and opened the corrected file in ACR4.1.
ACR did not recognize the file as a raw file.
I also tried to solve the problem in another way, using tools suggested by Harris, but no success there, either.
At this point I think we are out of luck until Adobe ships an update.
Those not wishing to see the gory details should stop reading here.
(pss, I'm guessing this means you! )
--
Harris, I actually tried tiffcp first--I installed it and ran with the -f option, but no luck. (no -B but -b did not seem to be applicable).
Secondly, parsed IFD0 with a hex editor and found that the change of the string "P45" to the string "P45+" caused four subsequent fields to be non-word-aligned. The TIFF spec is somewhat ambiguous whether this is legal or not, but I patched the file my word-aligning the fields and adjusting all relevant pointers. As excited as I was, no go--there was no change in behavior by ACR.
[If anyone from Phase One is reading, IFD0 Entries 13's & 14's value fields point to ULONGs at an odd offset. There are also two corresponding offenders in IFD1. This is on P45+ files written to the CF card.]
I suspect Adobe has 'fingerprinted' filetypes that they wish to recognize as raw (a simple constant binary match of some some small number of bytes at some offset into the file). Given that the P45+ file is organized quite differently from the P45 file (image data precedes the IFDs versus the other way around with the P45), and as such it fails Adobe's fingerprint test. My guess is this is why ACR assumes it's a standard TIFF and doesn't treat it as a raw file.
The reason I believe they are fingerprinting is because the Adobe Open dialog makes an instant determination on whether the .TIFF file is "just a TIFF" or is a Camera Raw file saved as a TIFF. They are doing this nearly instantaneously, so this cannot be deep parsing of the file.
In any case, unless I reshuffle the blocks (IFD0, IFD1, Makernotes, EXIFIFD, and so on) to make everything look like the P45 file, I suspect it ain't gonna work. The reason tethered seems to work is because the backs are not encoding the TIFF file in this case, and the code running on the PC to encode the data seems to have changed little for the two backs.
Sorry there's no good news, but I thought I would follow up to let folks know that my efforts were not successful.
And now I think I should go back to making some art!
Best regards,
-Brad