Page 1 of 1

Problem with Original sizes (RAW)

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 9:40 pm
by sfage
I have an original shot that is 90cmX60cm. I thought I might try fiddling around with the file size (300 dpi... rather than 72) just to see what it would do. Now all of my RAW shots are converted to 8X6 inches ( and calls that the original size).

I can't stop the program from doing this. When I change the output the image becomes extremely noisy.

I have DCSE and I just downloaded the update.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:43 am
by RAG
sfage,

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that your camera is stuck at that resolution?

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:22 am
by sfage
Nope!

The software is stuck on that resolution. It says the original RAW photo is 8.6X6.4. The output is the same. That's on 300 DPI (which the software now (always) chooses as its default resolution). Then, when I go to the drop-down menu and choose 72 dpi it says the original is the same size (8.6X6.4) but the scale goes up to 417% and the output goes up to 35.6X26.7.

Now, exactly the same photo is saved (jpeg) in my cam along with RAW. The dimensions are exactly what they should be (35.6X26.7).

I need the raw resolution because I am shooting a series of abstracts which are quite severe. Here's an example (this was a jpeg out of the camera).

http://zed.cbc.ca/go?user_id=5343&c=con ... =shanefage

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:42 am
by RAG
sfage,

Which Software is it that you are using? If it is one of the LaserSoft applications that is stuck there is probably a preferences folder you can delete in order to reset everything to the defaults.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:31 am
by sfage
Yeah, it's sliverfast dcse. It came with my Leica.

I wonder where the prefs are. I will look. Do you know where they are?

(Mac G4 laptop)

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:49 am
by RAG
Well,

I think the quote below from Mr. Noak will answer your question.

LSI_Noack wrote:Deleting the prefs folder (while SilverFast isn't running) might be a remedy to this issue.

On a Mac OS X, the SilverFast prefs are located in /User/(your username)/Library/Preferences/LaserSoft Imaging/SilverFast.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:24 pm
by sfage
Nope. Didn't work.

I think I'll buy adobe instead of this.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:30 pm
by RAG
sfage,

I think I get your confusion now. If you have an image at a particular size (i.e. 3X5) at 300dpi and you lower the dpi to 72 you are then able to create/display the image at a much larger size. This is true even in Photoshop.

Take a look at the two screen shots from Photoshop below. The first one shows the image information from a picture at a resolution of 96ppi, and the second one shows what happened when I changed the resolution to 72ppi (The document size changed from 11.708 X 6.115 to 15.611 X 8.153). Also note that the "Pixel Dimensions" (the number of pixels in the image) remain the same along with the file size. Basically, in this case you are controlling the distribution of the pixels in the image, not the number of pixels.


<img src="/img/forum/pixels.jpg"> <img src="/img/forum/pixels_2.jpg">

I hope this helps!

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 5:42 am
by sfage
Hey, thanks very much for the amount of time you've put in to this!

I think the real issue here is: I know the images that come out of the camera are 2560 X 1920. Highest res jpeg, or raw. The software will recognize the jpeg and leave it at that size. Raw, it will not. It changes the size to 615 X 462... or, 24% of its original size. The software now does this with all raw phohtgraphs as a default.

So, without touching a single thing:

JPEG 35 X 26 inches.
RAW 8.6 X 6.4 inches.

Same photo.

In order to get the RAW back up to the size it is supposed to be, I have to blow it up (the actual output size) over 400%. When I do that and export it so I can work with it in PSE2, the photo is as grainy as can be.

When I use a freeware version (Rawker) to export the same image to TIFF and open it with PSE2, the dimensions are correct (35 X 26 inches).

My original thought was that silverfast would produce a superior image.... that's why I wanted to use it instead of Rawker. Ostensibly, silverfast is a program that I have paid for because it was included in the price of my camera. Rawker, I downloaded for free.

So, I installed silverfast on my G3 laptop (my other computer). The preferred memory partition specified by the program is 80 megs. It won't open a raw photo. An error message comes up and says: "Not enough memory". So, doubled the memory partition to 160 mb. An error message comes up and says: "Not enough memory".

I have a seaking suspicion that this is not a well written macintosh program. This program is as buggy as hell.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:31 am
by sfage
Oh!

I forgot to tell you two things:

1) in OS9, it actually opened a RAW photo, *once*. I did absolutely nothing to it. I just opened it to see if it would actually work. It worked... once. It has not worked since. I can not open a single RAW photo with it now.

2) In OS9, you can't actually open the program by clicking on "SF Launcher". Yes, you will get the little dialogue box that says "open" and you can click on that button until your head turns purple. That won't actually open anything.

You have to open the preferences. "SF Launcher.prf"

Then the launcher will come up... then the program will start.

... and yes, I have deleted the preferences... blah, blah, blah.

I have tried to open and use this program on two different computers. This program is a mess. OS9, OSX... doesn't matter.

This program is unusable.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 7:04 am
by RAG
sfage,

Did you complete a support form located at the following link? If not I recommend it so that one of the LaserSoft technical support folks may follow up with you on this issue.

The link:
http://www.silverfast.com/problemreport ... opic=Usage

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 7:01 am
by sfage
Once again, I really appreciate the time you have spent trying to help me. Based upon the posts by members of the web team in other threads (but not this one), I get the sense that I must have found something that's a problem.

So... there you go...

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 7:51 am
by RAG
sfage,

I'd still submit a support request just to be sure your issue is addressed. You know, "The more the merrier", right? ;-)