Another Sigma/Foveon first: Complete Adobe support.

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by George Preddy, Apr 25, 2004.

  1. Foveon/Sigma have become the first DSLR manufacturer to offer complete
    Adobe support to their user base, another professional first. It is
    smart indeed to make their RAW decoding engine available to Adobe. It
    is also smart of Canon not to do so, since Canon's own RAW routines
    are universally spat-upon junkware.

    Now, Photoshop based workflows have access to the same extreme high
    quality that Sigma Photo Pro offers, all other DSLR users can only
    wish. Good job Sigma/Foveon in further cementing your status as the
    only true pro-quality DSLR option!
     
    George Preddy, Apr 25, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. (George Preddy) wrote in
    What are you talking about? Adobe PS has RAW support
    for almost any camera around, including Canon cameras.
    And now, at last, it also has support for Sigma.

    OK - you like the Foveon sensors. That's fair enough.
    But why do you ramble about Sigma lenses and other
    bogus advantages with Sigma cameras?


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Apr 25, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. George Preddy

    Mike Engles Guest


    Hello

    I think what he is trying to say is that Sigma have given Adobe complete
    access to their RAW format, wheras the other DSLR makers have not.

    I don't know if it is true.

    Mike Engles
     
    Mike Engles, Apr 25, 2004
    #3
  4. George Preddy

    ~ Darrell ~ Guest

    WTF. I downloaded the Pentax RAW, Adobe's own RAW plugin and the one from
    Genzo. It seems Adobe and others didn't bother with a RAW support for a
    third tier maker (Sigma)
     
    ~ Darrell ~, Apr 26, 2004
    #4

  5. Sigma did not imply that when they released the news about a month ago.
    They just said there would be a plug-in in June. It's early which is
    unusual.

    I have run a brief test and the results on default settings (no
    adjustment) are impressive, with no option to double size the file, but
    two entirely different 'up' and two entirely different 'down' sizes to
    the Sigma options of half and double size. They are, approximately, a
    regular 6 megapixel size and a 12 megapixel size (and similar downsizing
    ratios). There are no bells or whistles, no special anti-aliasing or
    anything. Colour looks better than Sigma's own software, but the images
    appear a bit flat and lacking in vigour - smooth, natural, but rather
    flat and dull.

    Noise even at 400 is very low. In fact 400 speed shots are looking
    great, but nothing like as saturated or contrasty as Sigma's normal output.

    David
     
    David Kilpatrick, Apr 26, 2004
    #5
  6. OK, I finally give up... some of your posts are relevant, some
    slightly skewed view points, some interesting... but this finally gets
    you plonked as the most on topic, but irrelevant post.
     
    Jonathan Wilson, Apr 26, 2004
    #6
  7. Though I've no idea about what Sigma have done, in general, I think it's
    true. Canon have not released any data on their RAW format, AFAIK. Adobe's
    RAW plugin was based on original reverse engineering work done by David
    Coffin, and further adapted by Adobe themselves, if I'm right. I believe
    Dave Coffin's work formed the starting point for a number of third party
    converters. Others (like BreezeBrowser) use the Canon SDK and Canon
    libraries, just wrapping them in a different UI. I've not heard of other
    manufacturers being more forthcoming with their RAW format details. IMO,
    it's a serious mark against the major manufacturers that they don't
    provide this data to their customers - it serves no purpose I can see to
    withhold it, and releasing it would do a lot to re-assure users of RAW
    that their image data will remain accessible in the future.

    Mike.
     
    Mike Brodbelt, Apr 26, 2004
    #7
  8. I think what he is trying to say is that Sigma have given Adobe complete
    If it came from George's mouth, you know it's bullshit.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Apr 26, 2004
    #8
  9. George Preddy

    PTRAVEL Guest

    More lies from Preddy. Photoshop CS has native support for Canon RAW,
    including 10D. You can preview, make RAW level adjustments, e.g. exposure
    and, anticipating another of George's favorite lies, it's lightning fast.

    I suspect Foveon offered their RAW engine to Adobe because they wouldn't
    have included RAW support for otherwise.
     
    PTRAVEL, Apr 26, 2004
    #9
  10. At least someone else understood the point George was making.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Apr 26, 2004
    #10
  11. Yes they did, along with D70 RAW support. I downloaded it.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Apr 26, 2004
    #11
  12. Try the lastest PS CS plugin, just released, the original Adobe plugin
    was not the Sigma code but a reverse engineered plugin and was pretty
    darn poor. AFAICT, there is no difference between the two RAW
    decoding methods now, though some believe the newest CS plugin may
    have slightly updated color rendering routines from Foveon.
     
    George Preddy, Apr 26, 2004
    #12
  13. Canon still refuses to release their code to anyone, you are using a
    reverse engineered plugin that most say is quite bad compared to the
    few other third party options. Though as I said, Canon's own software
    is unanimously regarded as a total waste.
     
    George Preddy, Apr 26, 2004
    #13
  14. George Preddy

    PTRAVEL Guest

    No Preddy, "most" don't say it's bad. Only you do. As for Canon not
    releasing source code, I don't know (and I'll bet, neither do you).
    However, even if it were true, so what? Why should they release their code?
    Of course, I could understand Sigma doing this -- otherwise Adobe would
    simply ignore the Foveon, just like the rest of us.
     
    PTRAVEL, Apr 26, 2004
    #14
  15. There is no 'original' plug in. I am referring to 2.2, the current and
    latest release, which includes the Sigma functions. My comments above
    are not criticisms. The colour is more natural than the Sigma PhotoPro
    defaults, and the noise levels seem a little better too.

    David
     
    David Kilpatrick, Apr 26, 2004
    #15
  16. George Preddy

    Mick Sterbs Guest

    It never responds when challenged or put on the spot. It just quietly slinks
    away.
     
    Mick Sterbs, Apr 26, 2004
    #16
  17. George Preddy

    ~ Darrell ~ Guest

    He will with some Press Release regurgitation
     
    ~ Darrell ~, Apr 26, 2004
    #17
  18. Me neither - and I assume neither do George.

    But - it is all totally uninteresting.

    All RAW formats have been reenginered. It is not hard
    to read a RAW format. There is lots of code that can
    do that. And this reading is 100% the same whoever has
    made the code, if it comes from Canon/Nikon/Sigma/Pentax
    or not.

    The hard part is to do the Bayer interpolation. And
    this code can be the same for all Bayer cameras.

    You need a very special code for Foveon cameras though.
    I really think that Sigma had to give that to Adobe
    before they were interested in adding Sigma support.
    By far too much work otherwise.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Apr 26, 2004
    #18
  19. George Preddy

    Bill Funk Guest

    Hmmm... Let's see what your dictionary says about that:

    "The adverb "unanimously" has 1 sense in WordNet.

    1. unanimously, nem con, nemine contradicente -- (of one mind; without
    dissent; "the Senate unanimously approved the bill"; "we voted
    unanimously")"

    Can you provide ANY evidence that your statement is anything other
    than simply made up by you?
     
    Bill Funk, Apr 26, 2004
    #19
  20. George Preddy

    Bill Funk Guest

    Not true.
    He sometimes come back with a cite that proves he's wrong, and
    sometimes demonstrates that he can't use a dictionary, too.
     
    Bill Funk, Apr 26, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.