s7raw converter for S2

[Ron Reimer]

Anyone tried out this converter? Download at: http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-PaloAlto/9919/s7raw.html

I'm having some display problems and was wondering if anyone else is. See the s7raw thread in the FujiSLR forum at dpreview.com: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=7332180

Ron Reimer

[bjnicholls]

This isn't a converter for S2 raf files, it's for Fuji S7000 files that have a different format. Fuji put out only a worthless LE converter for the new camera and this is one of the garage shop converters that have been writted for it.

I really wonder if it's necessary to have all of these incompatible raw formats, it sure makes headaches for users.

If you read the revision history you'll see:

"F700/S2pro RAW files were supported but still under testing.
Custom and Auto Whitebalances settled by camera were supported. White balance by color temperature was added but it is not exact. R/G/B value indicator of the pixel on mouse cursor was added for Preview and Magnifier windows. Toggles of the toolbars were added on the menu. The size of magnifier was expanded in floating mode. Required memory was reduced on output. Some bugs and typos were corrected."

Obviously, this is a work in progress.

[Ron Reimer]

I don't understand. If it's not for S2 raw files, why does it claim to support S2 Raw files? It seems to work fine with my raw files from my S2, anyway, at least as far as the conversion process goes.

When I make adjustments to the image and then open it in Photoshop for fine tuning, it appears to be just as good as when I use the LE converter. The problem is with the display. I assume this bug and others will be worked out and we won't have to buy Fuji's over-priced EX converter.

Anybody tried s7raw? Let's help these guys work the bugs out of this thing!

[jknights]

This is a good find.

I love the interface. very clean easy to understand. Amybe Fuji should take a look and change their dreadful interface into his one.

I have just doen a quick test on it and will post separately two images from the same RAF. One processed in Bibble the other in S7 RAW.

Interested to see what people think.

N.B. NO changes to defaults in both programs. Out the box processing of a RAF.

[jknights]

processed with S7 Raw converter.
Only change is a resize to be able to upload.

[jknights]

processed with Bibble v3.1a Raw converter.
Only change is a resize to be able to upload.

[jknights]

Sorry about the sizes but I wanted to show a near identical comparison.

What do you think of the colors and sharpness. Very intersting results. If this S7 RAW is free then seems like a strong contender especially as it will save in JPG, (8/16bit) TIFF, (8/16bit) PSD. Also it will Batch process.


I would suggest that a few of us give it a trial (time permitting) and see what we think.

[Tom Nolle]

Here's a burning question for some of us; does the S7Raw converter preserve EXIF data on 16-bit conversions?

Tom

[jknights]

Tom,
In response to you rquestion.
Yes all the EXIF data is there. Great.

It saves in 8/16bit TIFF in S7Raw and throws an error message. If they could fix that then this is a really good package.

The PSD files 8 and 16bit open fine in PS-CS.

I am really getting enthusiastic using it.

Some deficiencies are:
Error saving TIFFS
Application is one sized e.g. It cannot be maximised to fill screen.
There are still some bugs around the docking and moving of pallettes but when this is fixed then it will be a real contender.

I would recommend people to try this program. It is very small and runs from anywhere. there is no need to install on computer just run the exe file.

I have mailed developer with these suggestions and requests for bug fixing.

[Tom Nolle]

Thanks, I tried it and found the same thing. I also tried converting some shots that, with the EX converter, required having the sensitivity boosted, and it was pretty hard to accomplish the same thing with the S7 converter. I think that if you either have EX or have the new CS Photoshop Raw converter, S7 raw is going to be a bit harder to use and won't produce quite the same result with a range of images with various degrees of over/underexposure.

Nice package, though, and I wonder if it would fix the problems with resolution in the high-res images of the S7000 that dpreview commented on. I don't have an S7000 so I can't try it!

Tom

[jknights]

Got a fix from the developer today.
http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-PaloAlto/9919/s7raw.html

TIFF saving fixed for both 8 and 16 bit.

Full EXIF details for PSD, TIFF and JPG are shown in PS-CS, iMatch and other EXIF readers that I have - VERY GOOD.

I have requested that he adds:
1. A slider for under/over exposed images that allows you to change easily exposure.
2. Ability to resize the screen to maximise - full screen resolution size, rather than a window as current
3. Ability use use a Zoom navigator like in Photoshop.

There are still one or two bugs present but he seems to be going the right direction and some of the images that I have reprocessed look very good.

[jknights]

Latest release of this code is much better.

There is now support for Fuji F5000 and F7000 RAW files.

The developer is obvious very keen to support the Fuji products. I asked whether he intended to extend support to other RAW formats but he said "Not at this time." I guess that he has inside knowledge of the Fuji RAw file formats as he is very rapid in getting the RAW formats supported and also the EXIF data are all present which is very unusual.

I'm a mini fan of the software as you probably can tell.!!

[Yamatan]

Jonathan,

I am also becoming fan of this program since I don't have any raw converter beside what came with Fuji which is useless.

I have been trying out here and I like it. But, I have been ony using a little.

Thanks for bringing this in.

-Tanka

[NRA]

Jonathan,

I too only had the LE software and hadnt really bothered with Raw images. I needed to spend some money and thought that it can wait a while.

Thanks for the lead to this programme. It certainly seems to work and ime enjoying another aspect of my S2 now.

Nigel:cheers:

[jknights]

Nigel,

I have both Fuji LE and EX (HyperUtility) and Bibble.

I think that the colour rendition and control is much better than any of the above in most situations. I ahev reprocessed some difficult/underexposed RAFs and it did not cope as well as Bibble or Fuji EX.

From a user perspective I think the S7Raw product has a great user interface.

I am going to request him to make the screen so it maximises rather than running in a window. That would make it really good for me. I run my PC in 1600x1200 resolution.

[deMille]

jonathan,

Thanks for the info on this. I just DL'd it yesterday and started playing for a short time. Looks pretty good. I'm going to try to put some difficult images in it and see what flys.

Dale

[jknights]

Dale,

I would be really interested in your results.

I found it great for well exposed images but with underexposed and very flat images it was not so good as Bibble. However that was two versions ago when I did those tests. I probably need to retest as he has done some extra work on the color processing side as well.

[StormChaser]

I never liked Fuji's converter so I started looking and I used Bibble before CS came out and I was really happy with it. But I prever to stay within one program, I can see the thumbnails in any size and then decide to use them or not. It works best for me. If you don't use CS, then there's alway's PS Elements where the plug-in works pretty flawless.

[maxtreme]

how long does it takes on an up to date computer to converter the raw files with s7-converter, my old one I tried with was no pleasure....

[jknights]

It took 92 seconds to process the 10 files that I use for my RAW-RAF file processing tests.

Therefore average 9.2 sec/image.

Without any tweaking the color is a bit flat and lifeless.
I have customised to the following settings.
Exposure = +0.5EV
Gamma = 2.00
Contrast = 18
Saturation = 60
Hue = 10

All the other controls are default.

[jknights]

Whoops forgot to put in my machine specs.

Pentium4 2.0GHz, 1GB RAM, 850GB disk space. Machine is running Windows 2000 Professional + full set of updates and SP4.

S7RAw is absolutely tiny (All files = 880KB and S7Raw exe is only 672KB). Just shows what can be done. No MS bloatware here.

:D

[bjnicholls]

I didn't like Bibble last I tested it since it did obvious smearing of details compared to EX and other converters. Perhaps it has been improved over the last several months, I haven't kept up with updates. Using Elements means you can't benefit from using high bit files since it's 8 bits only. It will open 16 bit images, but it converts them to 8 bits as you do so. The attached image shows a Bibble detail on the left compared to EX 1 on the right.

[jknights]

BJ,
I remember this post. I have similar images with 'cling film in certain areas' !!!

Can you try S7 RAW and see if it improves the results for you.

My images don't show the artifact as well as yours.
My use of S7raw indicates that it is reduced or almost completely removed so it looks like being a Bibble and Adobe RAW v1 artifact of processing.
The new ACR2.1 also processes much better so it looks more and more like PS-CS and ACR2.1 is very much coming out on top.
I hope that Bibble4 due sometime soon (I hope) can compete or else I will need to look at my workflow and move over to PS-CS.

[maxtreme]

now I´m sure that a new computer would be great for me.
Also think its time to bring big props to the staff behind this converter

[bjnicholls]

I decided to download s7raw, since it doesn't need an install the risk seems low. First impressions aren't great. The default application window size is very small, but I found the menu selection for a larger size. The "magnifier" pane is too small to be very useful and the magnifying glass icon's center doesn't correspond to the center of the magnified view. The initial read from a shot I'm familiar with from other tests looks quite green and underexposed. While playing with the controls, the converter has locked up cold. I'll have to kill it and try again to see what the output image looks like. Compared to other S2 raw converters, this one isn't ready for prime time, but I'll see what it does to details vs. EX2 and ACR.

Okay, I restarted the application and took its default settings for a conversion. The "as shot" color balance is miserable. The image has a green cast that isn't even close the the EX or ACR interpretation. Highlights are blown out a little more than EX, much more than ACR. EX 2 has the best detail, ACR is a close second, s7raw is quite soft for detail, even after sharpening and it creates nasty jaggies. s7ras does a bizarre color artifact in some areas I can't understand. I'll capture it just because it's so odd (and bad) - look at the weird color stripes on the bright cream-colored element.

I won't be testing Bibble updates since it defaults to giving itself control over raw file formats and it doesn't uninstall cleanly. It would have to have some real benefits over ACR to attract my interest. s7raw has a long way to go before it's on my list of useful converters. Nasty.

[bjnicholls]

Here's the uploaded image, forgive the size, but it does show the issues with s7raw...

[jknights]

BJ,

Which image is processed with what ?
The upper image has much more saturated colours and therefore I guess is S7RAW and the lower image is I guess ACR2 or 2.1

Am I guessing right ?

I can see 'problems' with both processors. If you want your images processed and natural colour then the ACR is more right if you want them Velvia-ified then the S&RAW will please.

I am very impressed with the new ACR v2.1
I have mailed Eric Hyman (Bibble) saying that he needs to release his V4 soon or he will lose customers. He says that he is near to release but wont give a date but that the Bibble4 is better than ACR !
We will need to wait and see.

[jknights]

New version of S7Raw released that now allows a thumbnail preview. Makes life so much easier when you have huge numbers of RAFS. :cool:

BJ...
I have been looking at your comments.
re: S7RAW not being ready for prime time.. I agree somewhat there are still refinements that need to be done but I am feeding these back to the developer and he is very responsive. I still want an infinitely variable resizeable screen not just his x1, x1.5 and x2 levels. I cant fro the life of me work out why he has done this !!

re; Colour cast. yes, hence i have my own defaults that seem to adjust for this. Obvious ly this wil change under different conditions. UK dull grey light v. USA nice sharp bright winter light !!

Re: The "magnifier" pane is too small to be very useful and the magnifying glass icon's center doesn't correspond to the center of the magnified view.
You can resize it and I have found the x is central. in th emagnifier. Also I like the dual use for magnifier and white colour balance choice.

Re: The colour stripes Agree.

Re: Jaggies, I havent seen any in my images after processing but there are there on screen while you are manipulating - very disconcerting !!!


Re: I won't be testing Bibble updates since it defaults to giving itself control over raw file formats and it doesn't uninstall cleanly. - I dont understand this. Do you uninstall from Control Panel/Remove Programs.? This works cleanly every time for me.
On the control over RAW file formats I dont understand.

I wish I could get together with you for a good chat and a drink. Any chance of you coming to UK ???!!

[bjnicholls]

I wouldn't use the s7raw version I used for the above (the top image) based on my experience. The color artifacts and lack of detail alone are bad enough. As a development project, this application has potential if the author can improve the interface but especially the output quality.

I couldn't resize the area of the s7raw magnifier to anything very useful. I prefer the other applications that magnify the whole preview image area. ACR does this best and fastest. EX will magnify, but only in sequential steps and it only processes part of the image at a time. The small magnified window would be okay as an option. s7raw has a maximum control window size that's pretty small on my high res monitors.

When I unistalled Bibble the last time, it retained its hold over Fuji raw files and the icons still showed as Bibble objects. The Photoshop plugin didn't uninstall completely and there were leftover registry items. I really don't like applications that latch onto file associations without permission and that don't uninstall well. Especially when they're minor applications that mess with my important tools.

[jknights]

BJ,
Some/most of your, and mine, criticisms have been addressed in the latest release of S7RAW.
S7raw ver0.2.9 build 94.
http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-PaloAlto/9919/s7raw.html

There is an issue with the interpollation algorithm in the latest version in that it produces a 4pixel grey band on left of processed image and loses a 15pixel band on the right. Well spotted by JP.


I think the product is inching past the Fuji and Bibble product as th einterface issues get ironed out. There are still some items that need to be sorted.

1. Gamma spin buttons have reverse effect!!
2. Interface needs some more tidying and refinement.
3. Colour settings needs to be more intuitive and standard.
4. Processing speed - could it be improved ? Everybody wants to go faster. In reality we can probably wait or batch process overnight, none of us are that busy or end results that critical to be had now. Else shoot in JPG and lose quality but get speed. There is always a trade off.
5. Etc.......


Are there any particular items that you would like to see changed or introduced ?
I have offered before and I said then I am happy to collate and feedback to the developer in a consolidated form if it makes the process easier for the developer and we get a better product for us in a shorter time.

Also if the product stays free then it puts pressure on others to compete. Fuji, Bibble are you listening ?

[daxb]

Jonathon

Interesting! I have just downloaded the latest version and will have a closer look. Thanks for staying with it and keeping us imformed, as this product matures.

Cheers

daxb

[bjnicholls]

Be aware that although there's no installation for s7raw, it takes over the .raf file extension for itself when you launch the application. If you prefer to have the Fuji viewer or Photoshop CS open your raw files when you do a direct double click, you'll need to reset the ownership of the extension.

I prefer that applications as before assigning themselves ownership of file formats.

[jknights]

BJ,
I agree with you. I hate this as well. I will feedback to the developer.

[jknights]

JP, Mike, here is the response I got from developer. (my emboldening on his responses

""Jonathan M Knights" <jonathan@jknights.plus.com>" wrote:

>when converted in 16 bits *.TIF (or *.PSD), the resulting pics become
>4288x2840 pixels instead of the original 4256x2848 pixels !

If you're using ver0.2.7 or later, output size of the pic from S2 must be 4288x2880. Please verify.
It is larger than that by LE(4256x2848).
s7raw outputs the portions which will be trimmed and thrown away by LE.


>...and as Keith stated, there is a 4 pixels wide band of "grey" pixels

Because those are edges of the sensor.
LE trims those edges so they cannot be seen.

Hmm, interesting I always thought that there might be an issue at the edges of CCD which is why the manufactures tend to trim out the edges in their softwares.

>BUT ! I found that the WHOLE pic has been moved 15 pixels on the left !
>Try this: convert the same pic with both "S7RAW" and "EX", then put
>them pixels on the left ! MORE : the S7RAW converted pic is missing 15
>pixels on the left as compared to the EX converted pic, BUT it has 15
>MORE pixels ON THE RIGHT, as compared to the EX converted pic !!!

It seems strange. I have some RAFs from S2 but no such problem occurs on them. s7raw always outputs wider images than that by LE. Can you send me those RAFs?


I can reproduce this with all my RAFs but I need to blow them up to 1500% in PS to see the 2 grey pixels (on the left) in mine.
Personally I think that these extra pixels are not that useful to me but I am not usre I want grey edges to the pictures but I guess that the grey edges would be imperceptible at less than X16 (800%) enlargements. Also I am wondering if the number of pixels in the grey left side band will not be an intra-CCD variation thing. :confused:



Regards
s7raw.


JP, can you define (exactly in email to me) how you got to the identification of the 4 grey pixels (left) and the missing 15 pixels (right). What software and from which part was the info obtained.


Thanks

[JPS]

Originally posted by jknights
......JP, can you define (exactly in email to me) how you got to the identification of the 4 grey pixels (left) and the missing 15 pixels (right). What software and from which part was the info obtained......
Hi Jonathan ! I'll try to re-do the process wich made me find "how many pixels" were grey, and "how many" were missing on one side, BUT gained on the other... not sure I remember, but I'll try and llet you know by E-mail !
:cheers:

[jknights]

JP,
Thanks for the email I have sent on to developer.

I got this extract from a response as an initial reply.

LE's output size is 4256x2848.
s7raw's is 4288x2880.
They differ 18 pixels on left and top, 14 pixels on right and bottom.
s7raw's output size is wider than LE's. So s7raw's output must contain all pixels of LE's output.

He is fixing some of the small annoyances in the interface e.g. Gamma spinbuttons == up button decrements rather than increments, and the down button increases rather than decreases the Gamma value.

He has said that he will fix the grey band issue.
I understand about your claim of a few grey pixels on left.
I will make the grey band inconspicuous on the next version.

[JPS]

Hi Jonathan ! thanks for the quick feedback !!!

I guess the guy (is he alone ?) who's developing S7RAW is/are really doing a fantastic job, knowing that Fuji is not really willing to give away it's technical datas concerning their RAF format...

What I still don't understand is HOW they can deliver more pixels on their converted files than the maximum size "given" by Fuji originally ???

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that they will end-up with a far better -and more attractive- program than any other... just a few things to add : perhaps a wider choice of sharpness would be great !?!

Thank YOU for beiing a beta-tester and helping us all...
:cheers:

[jknights]

JP,
I guess thew closest simile I can find is that the CCD is like a canvas of a painting but when the painting is hung it normally has a frame thatt overlaps the edges to hide the roughness of the strecher and the nails.

The CCD output is the maximum area of CCD as measured in pixels (see below, item 2 = 6.49MP) and the actual output is reduced (see below, items 1 = 6.17MP) so that they do not use right to edge of CCD to avoid have dead pixels, etc. Usually if there are dead pixels they will try to cut the wafer along these so that it maximises yield. This is my understanding.



See this info from Fuji site about S2.

1. Number of effective pixels 6.17 million pixels

2. CCD sensor 23.0 x 15.5mm Super CCD, 6.49 million pixels in an interwoven pattern
(Number of total pixels: 6.49 million pixels)

3. Number of recorded pixels 12.1 million pixels (4,256 x 2,848)
6 million pixels (3,024 x 2,016)

[jknights]

JP, and others,

regarding the sharpness control on S7RAW.

What would you prefer.

1. A slider control
2. More fixed points.
3. Something else - please define.


My view is that if you use Normal sharpness now and then later want more then you would do that change in a controlled fashion using PS and its USM controls.


Please can I have some feedback.
I will request this change as soon as I get a definitive answer.

[JPS]

Hi Jonathan !

For myself, I would like a slider control for the sharpness, as one can use the magnifier on a chosen part, and check the amount of sharpness we want (apart the USM that one can allways apply afterwards, of course) !

Apart from that, I would love that, at the FIRST time that we start the program, the screen comes EMPTY, giving the user the choice of WICH sub-screen he wants, and that the program REMEMBERs this choice until next time... I guess this is only looking for "my" taste of perfection... these arangements doesn't help the program itself working better... just cosmetics things... :p
Have a good week-end !:cheers:

[Ron Reimer]

Jonathan,

I would like a button that would compensate adequately for the inherent softening effect resulting from the filtration used in the camera software. From what I understand about sharpening, it should be done in two steps, minimally before tweaking, and as a last step before printing, which I do in PS. I don't know what this minimal level is, and I wouldn't know how to set a slider to the appearance of the image in a magnified screen, so a slider would not be of much use.

Reimerron

[jknights]

Ron,
I asked S7RAW about this when I first started to test the software as teh three levels were called Hard, None, Soft. They are now called Hard, Normal, Soft.

His response was that the use of Normal/None was best if you were going to post process.

Does this help.?

i guess what you are saying is that there is usually an anti-aliasing filter in fornt of the CCD that reduces sharpness. And therefore is it possible to have a button that is Anti-Aliasing On/Off.

Do I understand correctly ?

[KeithM]

Bit of a tough one this. So many variables.... how much are we compensating for lens softness in addition to the anti-alias filter ? - this means many settings for different optics, never mind the personal preference of the user. In one way, having an option that replicates/mimics the camera settings of soft/normal/hard would make the settings more familiar to users.

...I get the impression that currently s7raw's options are:

- normal ( no processing so leaves the image in it's original 'soft' state )
- soft ( which makes it a softer soft ) and
- hard ( which sharpens a little )

Is that right ?

Imho, the same function as USM would be best, but then as you say we have that in our editors. Is there any image-quality benefit in doing this at the RAW [ conversion ] stage ? - I can see that there may be better quality working in 12bit land ( less noise, better control of edge enhancement ) but this is an awful lot to ask for ! :)

Keith.

[Ron Reimer]

Jonathon and Keith,

I had been thinking along the lines of Jonathon's Anti-aliasing on/off concept, until Kieth's post reminded me that there was more to the initial stages of sharpening than just compensating for the aa filter. There must be some level of primary sharpening that proponents of two stage sharpening recommend, that would be appropriate for incorporating in the pre-conversion work-flow without losing data that might come in handy when tweaking in photoshop later. It is this minimal pre-sharpening which I think would be appropriate to have a button for.

[KeithM]

Ron et al,

I use 2 stage sharpening much along the lines described in Microsoft's Technical Article (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/digitalphotography/learnmore/fixit/sharpening.asp)

The first sharpening can be generalised as a low radius, low threshold but high amount USM - though I find that I vary the amount most often ( depends mostly on the lens used ) to get a 'not over-sharpened' look but sometimes the threshold if the image is a bit noisy. The figures quoted though would be a good starting point.

The one thing I would say though is that if s7raw were to implement a USM equivalent process as part of the conversion, once the actual code is written, it is very easy to write another panel that lets the user adjust the 3 parameters !

( I say easy, but with the utmost respect for s7raw's programming and time :) - I am a part-time programmer at work but not in this particular field... and I know what it's like when the users of my programs keep coming back with 'just one more little modification" !! :p )

Keith.

[jknights]

I'm not sure what to feedback.

There are obviouslt two sets of sharpening rules.

The first set concern th einitial processing of the image. I am not sure if we want to change this or not. I will be guided by you all.

The second stage is a sharpening that could essentially be done is PS or other graphics package. I am not sure we want to get involved here.


With regard to the first stage sharpening only ?
What do we want to ask for ?
How would we like to see it implemented ? As now - Series of radio buttons/Slider/ (single) Button/Something else ?

Anything else ?

[JPS]

Question is: would we GAIN anything to have a wider range of sharpening on the RAW file itself, and afterwards "refine" in PS, or not ?

If yes, then it would be great to be able to go as near as possible to the "final" workflow WITHIN the RAW file, eg. Sharpness, WB, Contrast, Colors etc..., as long as these processes are lossless than the same ones in PS.

Else, it's only a matter of "converting" in TIF or PSD or JPG, with a better result than another RAF converter, isnt'it ?

[KeithM]

For the first sharpening process:

Simple answer ( but complex coding ) is USM with amount/radius/threshold on controls as per brightness/contrast/etc... with values normalised to be similar to Photoshop ( which are also, oddly enough, similar to PaintShop Pro as well ! :) ).

This is, I feel, a justifiable early step in maximising image quality as a normal part of the digital workflow. As Jean-Peirre points out, if this results in better 'quality' as a consequence of working with the raw 12bit data, then it's worth doing within s7raw. If there is no benefit, then post processing in your chosen editor is OK. The only way I believe to answer that though is for s7raw to implement the USM and ( let us ? ) try it...

The second USM is one that you apply after all editing, specifically for printing, so imho need not be considered within the Raw conversion process.

Keith.

[jknights]

I think S7RAW must be reading our comments here. He does hav a link.

See latest version that I have just downloaded and done a quick test.

Seems like he has put in our requested features already.!!!

s7raw ver0.2.10 has been released. http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-PaloAlto/9919/s7raw.html

Please try the new one.
I think that it is improved.
I have also gone back to using his defaults rather than my custom settings.

[JPS]

Downloaded it 5 minutes ago...

Only one word:WOW !

...when you set the screen as you want it (with or without some of the sub-screens, where you positioned the main setting screen, etc...) the program KEEPS all this in memory until next time you open it !!! (I don't know HOW it does it, because it doesn't create an *.ini file !?!)

...the sharpening possibilities are really widened !!! ...must make plenty of tests... yepee !!!

...this looks more and more like a WINNER !!!

Congrats to the team !!!

:cheers:

[KeithM]

You could very well be right Jonathon.

Downloaded - although I'll have to wait till tonight to test !

Best organise the coffee maker and get some pizza ordered in ! :p

Keith.

[jknights]

Keith, a beer or bottle of wine to go with teh pizza.

I've been busy DIYing today. Chipping of cork tiles stuck to a bathroom floor. Very hard and dusty work. Never mind it is all finished now.

Tomorrow I have two sets of testing to do.
My software (new functionality) and S7RAW.

[KeithM]

Jonathon,

"beer or bottle of wine" !! - I have some lucid memories of mixing alcohol and computers. Different sort of crashes :D but in a much more socially acceptable way.

Sliding off the chair would be the best !!:rofl: but that involved a bottle of whiskey, designing a multi-layer PCB and computer-induced time-dilation effects. The first hint was when I couldn't get the tracks straight !! :D

Sympathies on the cork tiles by the way.. :rolleyes:

Had a go with the latest version of s7raw...

The Custom Sharp seems to work nicely - a strong effect with no obvious overshoot on edges and a slight increase in noise. I'm not sure how to use or combine (?) the soften though...

The white-balance finetune is nice, and gives a better result than using the Colour controls which are best used for more specific tweaks ( which I would still use to adjust black balance :) ).

Histogram 'PMS' - I can see that P is Preview and M is Magnified but what is S ? - the histogram was blank on S. Being able to check the histo on the magnified portion is v good but auto-jumping to M when you select an area to magnify is a bit disconcerting when I wanted to maintain watch over the whole image ( I apologise if that's configurable - I admit I didn't go looking for any config settings :rolleyes: ).

I like the slightly larger ( pixel ) size of output image, now with nice clean edges. You do actually get a tad wider angle-of-view which is good thing in my books ! :)

To sum up, I was able to output images that were corrected how I wanted them to be. It does take time to find which adjustment serves best for a particular correction and get the appropriate value but that's a side-effect of having such a versatile program. You get out of it what you put in !

I have realised though that there is one thing I would love to be able to do - grab hold of those parameter curves and tweak them directly.... :eek:

Keith. :)

[photoworks]

I tested it for a little bit and found it very promising.
I think it's going to be my favourite, the results come out better than Fuji EX and Adobe Raw.
Better sharpness and most important, better detail.

--------
Vasilis

[jknights]

Keith,

I have sent the following questions to S7RAW.
============================================
1. ??Histogram 'PMS' - I can see that P is Preview and M is Magnified but what is S ? - the histogram was blank on S. Being able to check the histo on the magnified portion is v good but auto-jumping to M when you select an area to magnify is a bit disconcerting when I wanted to maintain watch over the whole image ??

What is the S ?

2. ?? If you save a set of parameters e.g. filename.S7R (DSCF_0475.S7R) does S7RAW use these parameters when it does batch processing if the S7R file is in the same directory as the RAF file ?
============================================

If he says "Yes" to the second then I don't need to use Bibble any more for my S2 RAFs !!!
This is quite a departure for me as I use Bibble for boith D1X and S2. the results from S7RAw are now superior to Bibble (quality and ease of use) and also Adobe ACR (quality - sometimes and always wrt. ease of use.)


Do we have any more requests for enhancements ?


BJ, have you tried the latest build ? ( v0.2.9 build101)
I believe that it is a paradigm shift :D from the first release and a big step forward compared with the intermediate releases.

[jknights]

Keith,
I have had a chance to play with S7RAW more...

The S stands for selection.
If you Ctrl+Left mouse you can select and area. This is the selection area and it shows a histo for that area. Very cunning as it can be a minuscule are.

Test and tell me what you think...

If the batch processing can use the S7R parameteres files then I will be rally happy. It doesn't seem to work in that way now.

[NRA]

The latest version is very good although I still have an issue that may well be driver error (me not a computer driver).

When looking through the magnifier and making an adjustment my magnified sample doesnt change and I have to redo the magnified sample to see the changes.

I am particularly interested in the lens aberation adjustments because my 14mm Sigma does suffer a bit and this may be the tool to change it as I dont hace CS where the other tool sits.

The sharpening tools are now very wide ranging and need careful use I suspect. Some stock libraries say "no sharpening" but I believe that a small amount of stage 1 sharpening to recover the CCD loss of sharpnes is a must just to get the image back to square one.



Nigel

[JPS]

Originally posted by jknights
.....If the batch processing can use the S7R parameteres files then I will be rally happy. It doesn't seem to work in that way now......
I had a try at batch processing, so to be sure of the result, I intentionnally f*****-up the settings, making the 5 pics in the batch looking very weird...
I ran the Batch Job and they all came out beatifully as weird as I played with the settings !

So, for me, no problem at all !!! I haven't found ONE bug -yet- in the latest S7RAW version !
:cheers:

[Ron Reimer]

Is anyone else experiencing malfunction of the numeric parameter adjustments for all of the sliders (Gamma, contrast, brightness, etc.) Only the sliders work and very coarsely at that. I wish the sliders were a little more fine tunable, or else that the numeric adjustments would work. Am I missing something? Or is there a glitch? I am using the latest version as of 3-18-04. Thanks everyone for your testing of this software.

[NRA]

Ron

I agree that the sliders are too coarse. I havent had a problem with using the numbers. Just click the cursor in the number box and use the up and down arrow keys to make adjustments.

Its a great tool. It now needs a manual.

Nigel

[Ron Reimer]

Nigel,

Are you sure your numbers work? What version are you using? The numbers do not work for me on ANY parameters for EITHER of the latest versions: 2.10.101 or 2.10.102.

[SteveFredrick]

Ron, I was playing with S7RAW last night and disconvered that hitting the ENTER key after you have typed in a number made it work.

As Nigel says--All it needs now is a manual. The job isn't done until the paper work is done. :D

[NRA]

Ron

Ime using 102 and I did forget to mention that you need to hit ENTER after changing values.

If yours is a bit buggy, best to delete it and download another. Its amazing that its such a small file when zipped.

Nigel

[jknights]

Reply from S7RAW.

>Two questions:
>1. ??Histogram 'PMS' - I can see that P is Preview and M is Magnified
>What is the S ?

S indicates histgram of "Selected Area".
To select area, drag pressing CTRL+left mouse button on preview window. Short descriptions will be shown in status bar on the bottom of the window when your mouse
cursor is on any item.

>2. ?? If you save a set of parameters e.g. filename.S7R (DSCF_0475.S7R)
>does S7RAW use these parameters when it does batch processing if the
>S7R file is in the same directory as the RAF file ?

No. We designed "Batch Job" to process all RAFs with the same parameter. You must load "*.S7R" file before open "batch job" dialog to apply it.
==============================================

Hmm...., it does not seem as though the batch job processes as I would like it to.
I can live witrh that as I can hand process the odd file rather than choosing to do each individually. In fact I would do this, post S7RAW processing, in PS-CS as I have even more control.

[bjnicholls]

I just downloaded the latest version and gave it a try.

It's much improved, but I still don't care for the interface. What's more, I still get the color moire artifact and very jagged aliasing. If I crank up the moire canceller to the max level 5, the color moire is minimized but then color suffers. Aliasing is still the worst that I've seen. This is also the worst of the converters for handling highlights, it severely posterizes near-whites on my reference image at a reasonable exposure value.

This isn't a color managed application and it doesn't support standard color models. There's no way to spec sRGB or Adobe RGB and the files come out without an attached profile. You can't judge color accurately while working in s7raw, the results look quite different (better, thankfully) when opened in Photoshop. However this means you can't do any white balance or profile tweaking in s7raw and know what it's really doing to the image.

I got the magnifier to it maximum size. It has to "float" and then be set to a larger size via the menu. It's still inferior to a full size magnified view, although it's fine as an option. The histogram is too small, the curves should standardize to the gamma level you choose. Instead they composite the gamma as well so it's really hard to read or use them. The default gamma setting of 1.8 makes no sense for a PC application. 2.2 is a better value and more accurately displays the image on most PC configurations.

The output should be given in pixels, "9/16" is meaningless as is "full size" since any size from a Fuji sensor is interpolated. I'm sure if I spent some more time with it I'd find more to comment on, but it's still a long way away from a tool I'd like to use. Assuming the output is further improved, the lack of color management is the biggest hurdle they need to overcome.

I hate to be the wet blanket at the party, but although I still see some promise and progress, I can't imagine using this when I have EX and ACR.

I thought the application was now smart enough to not to glom onto the .raf extension unless the user allowed it? The little sucker took over again. Okay, I restarted s7raw and discovered there's a menu check item you have to uncheck if you don't want it to take over the .raf extension. Problem is, if you exit and don't see this menu item, it takes over and unchecking it later doesn't restore the correct association. Dear s7raw programmer, the application should ask about the association when it boots. At the very least, it should default to not take over the extension unless the user checks the menu item (opposite of the current behaviour). I don't mind checking out an application that behaves itself...

[bjnicholls]

Here's another magnified detail showing s7raw vs. EX 2 showing the jaggies and moire...

[Steve P]

Guys,

The layout certainly looks different from the version I downloaded two weeks back.

I will check tonight. Silly question, will the newer version overide the older one on download? Is it me or are the sliders too sensitive when adjusting. You really have to be careful.


Steve:)

[KeithM]

Steve.... The program is a single 'exe so all you need to do is copy it over your current version ( unless you're a pessimist like me and save the previous version in a seperate folder, just in case the newer one bombs out badly ). I think the coarseness of the sliders that you, and others, have noticed is due to the program ( by default ) re-drawing the preview screen every time the slider changes value - you try and slide but then it stalls whilst the preview redraws, then catches up to where your mouse now is ! I've turned off the preview function ( checkbox marked Prv albeit it implemented as a 3-state control when it only needs to be 2-state ! ) - when I've changed a parameter, I tap the Enter key on the numeric keypad with the thumb on my right ( mouse ) hand :)

bjnicholls.... You're not wrong with your comments ! :) I couldn't say whether the developer ( a lone Japanese programmer if I understand correctly ? ) is aiming for a 'product' to rival current high-end commercial convertors or one to satisfy a more amateur/consumer level but it certainly knocks the socks of the 'similarly priced' Fuji LE convertor and gives many advantages over storing images as jpeg in-camera :D - the program is evolving as a result of feedback so hopefully the issues you raise will be addressed in the future.

Keith.

[jknights]

BJ,
I can see jaggies and moire in both.
There is also loss of detail in the EX2 version ?!? I'm not sure on this as I dont have the RAF to look at.

Is it possible to post a url to the RAF so I could download and test ?
I would like to do a test with ACR2.1 v. S7RAW v. EX2


Agree wiith you about the takeover of the RAF filetype.
However as there is no install program this is difficult to address other than to do as you suggest e.g. that S7RAW does not take over filetype unless you explicitly change it to that setting in S7RAW.

I however love the UI as I think all the others except Capture1 are pretty horrible or clinky. That includes ACR. To me ACR should be a pallette in PS not a preloader, I guess that it is a limitation of a plug-in.

Re:...This isn't a color managed application and it doesn't support standard color models. There's no way to spec sRGB or Adobe RGB and the files come out without an attached profile. You can't judge color accurately while working in s7raw, the results look quite different (better, thankfully) when opened in Photoshop. However this means you can't do any white balance or profile tweaking in s7raw and know what it's really doing to the image.
I think that we need to take this back to the programmer to address. I agree with you absolutely.

I still don't like the fact that the Gamma is auto to 1.8 in PC (It should be 2.2). What is it in a Mac 1.2 ??? Strange.


Thanks

[jknights]

I have sent this to S7RAW

Hi S7raw,

The review my several photographers has asked for the following enhancements.

1. Is it possible to have some form of colour management. I understand that this is a big request :-) Quote from one other photographer "This isn't a color managed application and it doesn't support standard color models. There's no way to spec sRGB or Adobe RGB and the files come out without an attached profile. You can't judge color accurately while working in s7raw, the results look quite different (better, thankfully) when opened in Photoshop. However this means you can't do any white balance or profile tweaking in s7raw and know what it's really doing to the image. "

2. In the defaults for the program can you make the Edit>"Associate CCDRAW with S7RAW" either be not checked on installation or make it so that any changes also adjust the system OS default associations as well ?

3. The default gamma value on PC should be 2.2 The current value shown is 1.8 which is the default value on a Mac !! Is this the real Gamma value of the system or a S7Raw value.?

4. In Output menu it should have a pixel value associated with each of the sizes e.g. Full size 4288x2880 for S2.

5. Possibility to use batch processing with the corresponding S7R files created previously and associating the S7R files during the batch processing with the coresponding RAF files. This would mean that you could pre-process the files and then batch process them into one folder/directory at a later time. I requested this before but you said that the batch processing was not designed this way.


Best Regards
Jonathan

[bjnicholls]

Keep in mind that the above samples are enlarged by upsampling to make the artifacts easier to see. That accounts for the obvious artifacts for both. I picked an area of the image that was causing problems with moire. The detail is from a shot in our new library building and it's one I'm familiar with from the first version of EX so I use it for testing conversion output. What you see is part of a hanging mobile that forms the shape of a human head out of books that dangle on thin wires. The wires make patterns that show demosaicing problems pretty well.

Do you really think the s7raw sample's aliasing isn't much more coarse and obvious? I suspect the demosaicing method that produces the strong jaggies also plays a role in the color moire - witness the frequency of the barberpole color stripes on the diagonal bit of buff-colored wall.

I personally much prefer the ACR interface to any of the conversion alternatives. The controls are intuitive, the preview is extremely fast and interactive, and since I'm working in Photoshop I really like the browser integration - especially working with 16 bit conversions. ACR renders slightly less detail than EX 2, but it handles highlights better without resorting to brute force exposure adjustments.

[jknights]

BJ,
To each his own or as the French say "Chacun a son gou"
I liek the S7RAw interface as it is more like the Capture1 interface. This program is very good but is horribly expensive.

The ACR interface is a problem to me as I would prefer it as a pallette style so I can do multiple comparisons. That said the output quality is great. ACR2.1 has really moved forward compared to the ACR1.

If only we could mix applications and take the best from each then we would be in a wonderful world !

[JPS]

...I still use S7RAW with more ease than Fuji's EX, but one thing is bugging me -maybe this have allready been noticed- : the magnifier doesn't follow automatically the changes you make in a setting ! After EVERY change you make in the Gamma, Brightness, Contrast, etc... you MUST click again with the magnifier to check the difference it makes... but if you are using a strong magnification, it's sometimes difficult to click on the exact same spot !
:cheers:

[jknights]

I understand JP.
There are several items that work like this. :-(

I will mail to developer.

[jknights]

Response from S7RAW on recent email from me.

"Request for enhancememts"
""Jonathan M Knights" <jonathan@jknights.plus.com>" wrote:
>1. Is it possible to have some form of colour management. I
>understand that this is a big request :-)

I don't know well about color management, but I'll check it out.

>2. In the defaults for the program can you make the Edit>"Associate
>CCDRAW with S7RAW" either be not checked on installation or make it so
>that any changes also adjust the system OS default associations as well
>?

I'm sorry I cannot understand what you want.
You mean you want to choose the way to associate in the installation process, don't you? As you know s7raw has no installer at the moment. So you mean you want the installer to make the association choosable in installation?

>3. The default gamma value on PC should be 2.2 The current value shown
>is 1.8 which is the default value on a Mac !! Is this the real Gamma
>value of the system or a S7Raw value.?

"1.8 on PC, 2.2 on Mac" is "Display gamma".
"gamma" of s7raw is not "Display gamma".
It is the conversion factor of RAW data and output data.
"1.8" seems good for RAW data of S7000.
If you say that 2.2 is good, it may be right for S2.
I don't have enough S2 RAFs to judge the suitable gamma.

>4. In Output menu it should have a pixel value associated with each of
>the sizes e.g. Full size 4288x2880 for S2.

It sounds good.

>5. Possibility to use batch processing with the corresponding S7R files
>created previously and associating the S7R files during the batch
>processing with the coresponding RAF files.

I'll take it into consideration.

Regards,
s7raw.

[jknights]

JP in response to yopur request about the Magnifier.

""Jonathan M Knights" <jonathan@jknights.plus.com>" wrote:
>More feedback from photographers.
>I think what is required is an automatic refresh of the magnifier
>window if changes are made to any of the processing values. Is this
>possible.?

Yes, Please mark "MGN" checkbox under sliders.

Regards,
s7raw.

[KeithM]

Hi everyone.

Thinking about producing b&w output from s7raw...

At the moment, setting Saturation to -100, then applying White Balance Fine Tune to emulate colour filters like red, orange, yellow and green works well ( being a keen landscape photographer, who also loves to work in monochrome, you'll have to forgive me a bias towards darkening the blue sky ).

Doing this with a custom panel might be better - either slider controls for the percentage of red/green/blue or options for 'colour filter' selection. This could also include another option - additional darkening of blue ( to emulate the effect of a polarising filter on the sky )... The basis of this is to darken the image where blue is the dominant colour. So as a first suggestion...

difference = blue - (( red + green ) /2)

where negative values are clipped to zero. Then using luminance based on your choice of 'colour filter'...

output = luminance - difference

The value of difference can be modified by a scaling factor to increase or decrease the effect. This step can introduce quite a bit of noise ( well, certainly working in 8bits with blue which is a noisy channel ) but this may improve when using 12bits within s7raw. I've found that using half the difference works well for most images. Also this is best done after the image has been adjusted for white-balance.

As well as acting like a polarising filter, this can also increase contrast for distant landscape by 'cutting' into the blue UV haze... ( btw - there is no reason why the darkening cannot be applied to a colour image )

I've compiled a rough 'n ready composite below as a quick reference to the effects of the above.

So what do you think ?

Keith.

[JPS]

Originally posted by jknights
JP in response to your request about the Magnifier.
""Jonathan M Knights" <jonathan@jknights.plus.com>" wrote:
>More feedback from photographers.
>I think what is required is an automatic refresh of the magnifier
>window if changes are made to any of the processing values. Is this possible.?

Yes, Please mark "MGN" checkbox under sliders.

Regards,
s7raw.

Right ! it works !!! ...it still take some time to refresh, but with MGN "ON" at least it does it automatically !

Well... it seems that, little by little, we are going to get WHAT WE ALL WANT, (assuming the guy who's building S7RAW keeps playing with us...!?!).

Keith's trys on B&W are very interesting... but this is getting a bit complicated for my little brain... I'll -courageaously- let him get it more sorted out before to give it a try too...
:cheers:

[jknights]

Interesting results Keith.
I'm working on playing with PS-CS to get pseudo Colour IR.

I love it. I wish that I could post a sample result but I cannot post attachments at present, I am sure Bryan will crack it soon but very frustrating in the mean time.

[bjnicholls]

>>"1.8 on PC, 2.2 on Mac" is "Display gamma".
"gamma" of s7raw is not "Display gamma".
It is the conversion factor of RAW data and output data.
"1.8" seems good for RAW data of S7000.
If you say that 2.2 is good, it may be right for S2.
I don't have enough S2 RAFs to judge the suitable gamma.<<

He's got it backwards. 1.8 is the default Mac gamma, 2.2 is the PC gamma. Gamma doesn't exist separate from the display properties as he's trying to suggest. The default comes up 1.8 on a PC and it's dark with normal gamma PC settings, 2.2 is about right. There will be a difference in appearance depending on the gamma the computer display uses.

The gamma interaction is integral to the display interface and gamma really shouldn't be a major control as it in in s7raw. He should do a separate gamma setting (a simple numeric value with slider) and then have a contrast curve adjustment instead of the gamma curve. With profile aware color management there wouldn't be a gamma setting at all. Nobody really wants to or should have to mess with gamma as a curve.

It makes very little sense to offer RGB controls and other color adjustment tweaks when you can't trust the preview to match the output image. If the application cant be made profile aware, then I'd dump all these controls and leave the user to sort out color, contrast and saturation via Photoshop using 16 bit files. It would be better to have a simple interface and not mislead users to think the adjustments are accurate. I personally wouldn't bother using a non color-managed converter unless there was no alternative.

[jknights]

BJ, I agree with you over the Gamma stuff. I find the interface easy to use and I tend to up the Gamma to 2.2 anyway and process without too many other changes. I prefer to process later in PS-CS. I still find ACR interface clunky but not so bad as Fuji EX.



Since I cant post images at the moment here is a link to my Colour IR stuff.
http://www.jknights.plus.com/JMK%20Photography/index_files/Page575.htm

[jknights]

There is now a build103 of S7RAW available.
http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-PaloAlto/9919/s7raw.html


This has better control of the association of RAF files amongst other new tweaks and small feature changes.

[JPS]

I downloaded the "build103" version and didn't find any difference, except that now, whatever change you make, the magnifier ALLWAYS comes back on screen !

...and I didn't find how to keep it OFF !!! :mad:

:cheers:

[jknights]

Click the grey tab with MAGNIF on it or click the RESET tab.

[cbeam2]

I haven't fooled with RAW but 1 or 2 times. I am considering trying it for some wedding formals. Will the RAW converter batch? If it does what are the settings options for the batch? I know someone who has the Canon RAW and they tell me that they can manually tweak one, then tell it to batch the rest using the same settings.

chuck

[jknights]

Yes the batch processing does work but.... it does not allow any parameters to use for individual files. One set of parameters are used for all files in the batch.
I have requested S7RAW to add this as this make the batch process more useful.

[jknights]

Got this reply from S7RAW.

""Jonathan M Knights" <jonathan@jknights.plus.com>" wrote:
>Hope that all is well with you.
>Do you intend doing any further enhancements ?
>Are you prepared to tell us what in advance.

Sorry, we are now busy and cannot spare enough time to improve s7raw at the moment.
We will continue improvement of s7raw when we can find time.
Build 103 is still the newest version.

s7raw.

[KeithM]

:D too busy with new software for the latest Fuji cams ??? :D

( just paraphrasing your question from the Hyper-utility thread ;) )

Pity - I was just trying to get a handle on file associations and drag 'n drop - and ask about some mods ! :(

Keith.

[Chayen]

Not that I'm an expert in working with raw files, I just happened to detect that a program as Qimage 2004.133 was able to open S2 RAF-files, which could be fine-tuned and saved as 16-bit TIFF files.
Some time ago I read an article about Qimage being even better in some aspects like sharpness than PS. Does anyone know about this?
The program can be downloaded from: http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/

[rbsmithphd]

I have done extensive comparisons of Fuji EX, Qimage and s7raw for converting RAF files. Detail preservation and color fidelity are basically indistinguishable in EX and Qimage. S7raw produces very inferior detail. Qimage does double duty as an exceptional printing program.

[jknights]

Latest version of S7RAW released.

Here is extract of mail from developer to me.
=====================================
Hi, I'm sorry to have kept you waiting.
s7raw ver0.3.0 has been released.
Some of your requests in past mails have been implemented.
Please try the new one.

http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-PaloAlto/9919/s7raw.html

Improvements from the previous version are as follows:
Multilingual UI was implemented (Currently, English and Japanese).
Output process was improved for speed and memory usage.
F810 and E550 RAW files were supported but still under testing.
Color Space support was added.
"Pixels size" was added in output size selection.
"AsShot"/"Average" WBs were improved.
"Use With Params(S7R)" mode was added on BatchJobs.
Some bugs were corrected.
RafExt.DLL(Explorer Extension) was added.

RafExt.DLL is an Explorer Extension to show thumbnails of RAF files in the Thumbnails view of Explorer and the FileOpenDialog on WinXP.

Regards,
s7raw.

================================================== =

Haven't had a chance to test.

[jknights]

Re: I have done extensive comparisons of Fuji EX, Qimage and s7raw for converting RAF files. Detail preservation and color fidelity are basically indistinguishable in EX and Qimage. S7raw produces very inferior detail. Qimage does double duty as an exceptional printing program.


I can't say that I totally agree with these comments.

QImage in my hands does not produce output that is anywhere near as good as the Fuji EX product. However as a printing output control software then I think that QImage is near peerless.

S7RAW has weaknesses but I have found it excellent where my RAFs are 'difficult' i.e. they produce artefacts or poor colour balance in my other softwares Adobe PS-CS ACRv2.2, Bibble3.1a, and Fuji EX.

I still havent found a perfect software and beleive that there are situations when RAW files processed in any one of the above softwares produce superior or inferior results when direct comparisons are made.
Having tested by changing single paramaters All I cna say is that it is the effect of quality of light and maybe very small (1/3-1/6 stop) exposure differences/effects.
If only the comparisons was more empirical but I don't like to shoot test targets as I think these are less useful than real life examples.

[JPS]

Hi Jonathan ! Glad to see you back and running... as it seems that you've been less often posting lately !
I had deleted S7RAW (earlier version) since I got Photoshop PS, but I downloaded the latest version and will try it with pleasure, hoping it gives even better -and faster- results than PS CS or Fuji's EX converter !
Thanks for letting us know...
:cheers: