Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 21, 2006, 6:41 PM   #41
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

they will read tiff also. one kiosk i checked would even read png. either of which is lossless.
  Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2006, 7:51 AM   #42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 250
Default

robar wrote:
Quote:
they will read tiff also. one kiosk i checked would even read png. either of which is lossless.
:!:

When I use PS tiff, windows (default) veiwer can't decode it.

Windows'll do the tiff out of the Oly ....
Panzergnome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2006, 9:16 AM   #43
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Panzergnome wrote:
Quote:
robar wrote:
Quote:
they will read tiff also. one kiosk i checked would even read png. either of which is lossless.
:!:

When I use PS tiff, windows (default) veiwer can't decode it.

Windows'll do the tiff out of the Oly ....
you're saying that when you save as a tiff from PS , windows picture viewer can't display it.. weird.. i'll go ck it out..

edit: works just fine here..
  Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2006, 5:07 PM   #44
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 250
Default

Looks like this: (1995-1999 version)
Attached Images
 
Panzergnome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2006, 8:59 PM   #45
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

now i'm not sure what you mean. if this was an image in PS and you saved it as a tiff and this is what WPV sees the tiff as then i think you have a problem with windows. are you using winXP???
  Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2006, 10:49 PM   #46
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 250
Default

Imaging for Window-Kodak-W2K

Why would a tiff file be different from the Oly to the PS one?????????

Why wouldn't the tiff file be backwards compat?

Did the tiff spec change?
Panzergnome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2006, 4:23 PM   #47
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

what's it look like when opened in irfanview. does it display correctly there??
  Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2006, 4:51 PM   #48
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default

RiceHigh wrote:
Quote:
Actually, I can see the difference with no matter which RAW convertor is checked against in-camera jpeg.

BTW, the moire/bayer artifacts look different somehow with PPL V1 against V2. But I found no big difference for V2.0 against V2.1.

If one wants to have more detailed pictures, I recommend SilkyPix (but then the noise suppression by default is no as good as the PPL 2)

Cheers,
RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
Well, I've just looked at PPL2 (Pentax Photo Lab 2 for those that wonder what it is!) and V2 is still sharper than is possible to get from v2-1 even when the sharpness is pushed to +3.

So for me (& I know a lot of you will say that PPLv2 is too sharp, too saturated) PPL v2 still produces results, straight out the camera, where a RAW conversionis easy to use & gives sharp images without a lot of hastle.
Attached Images
 
Catbells is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2006, 6:53 AM   #49
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default

And having looked at SilkyPix, whilst it has lots of 'bells & whistles' I still cannot get it match PPL v2.
Attached Images
 
Catbells is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:56 AM.