Bug 295523 - Canon Powershot S100 RAW improperly treated
Summary: Canon Powershot S100 RAW improperly treated
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: digikam
Classification: Applications
Component: Plugin-DImg-RAW (show other bugs)
Version: 2.5.0
Platform: Fedora RPMs Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Digikam Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-03-08 12:05 UTC by mnaugendre
Modified: 2017-07-31 15:42 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In: 5.1.0


Attachments
Your sample processed with dcraw_emu -w (30.49 KB, image/jpeg)
2012-03-08 13:13 UTC, Alex Tutubalin
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description mnaugendre 2012-03-08 12:05:34 UTC
CR2 files from a Canon Powershot S100 are not properly recognized and treated: they are heavily magenta-tinted, and show a strong lens distorsion.
Here is an example of both CR2 and JPG files produced by the camera:
http://www.marie-noelle-augendre.com/fichiers/Darktable/IMG_0008.CR2
http://www.marie-noelle-augendre.com/fichiers/Darktable/IMG_0008.JPG
Comment 1 caulier.gilles 2012-03-08 13:12:35 UTC
Marie Noelle,

This is a typical case where JPEG is better than RAW, due to post processing done by camera to render JPEG. Here you can see the comparison of Raw (on left side) and JPEG (on right side):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/digikam/6964153119/sizes/o/in/photostream/

RAW is loaded in light table as half size preview. We don't use JPEG embedded.
JPEG is full size preview.

If we load RAW JPEG embedded, both image are the same.

Why ? It's simple : you camera, to process JPEG, it apply Lens distortion corrections. You have used a short focal (as a fish eyes lens), and camera fix image using lens profile. Probably that chromatic aberration correction are processed. This is why the magenta-tinted area disappear in JPEG.

RAW file, is... raw image, unprocessed by camera.

It's not possible (or it's complex) to reproduce camera fixes with RAW. 

Alex can you confirm my analyse ?
Comment 2 Alex Tutubalin 2012-03-08 13:13:52 UTC
Created attachment 69370 [details]
Your sample processed with dcraw_emu -w

Cannot reproduce with LibRaw: dcraw_emu -w works fine on your sample (sure, no barrel correction). See attached result
Comment 3 caulier.gilles 2013-12-09 22:56:52 UTC
Marie Noelle

This file still valid using last digiKam 3.50 and a most recent version of libkdcraw ?

Gilles Caulier
Comment 4 caulier.gilles 2014-08-29 22:57:43 UTC
Marie Noelle,

What's about this file using last digiKam 4.2.0 AND last Libraw 0.16 ?

Gilles Caulier
Comment 5 caulier.gilles 2015-05-15 22:07:50 UTC
Marie Noëlle,

Problem still valid with last digiKam 4.10.0 ?

Gilles Caulier
Comment 6 caulier.gilles 2015-06-29 17:45:26 UTC
New digiKam 4.11.0 is available with official PKG installer for OSX.

https://www.digikam.org/node/740

Can you reproduce the problem with this release ?

Gilles Caulier
Comment 7 caulier.gilles 2015-08-22 06:37:30 UTC
digiKam 4.12.0 is out :

https://www.digikam.org/node/741

We need a fresh feedback using this release please...
Thanks in advance.
Comment 8 caulier.gilles 2016-07-15 18:54:55 UTC
With digiKam 5.0.0, this problem is not reproducible.
I close this file now. Don't hesitate to re-open if necessary.
Gilles Caulier