like many here in our little perl world, I'm getting into digital photography as an official hobby (or back into photography, depending on how you look at it). despite all the resources out there with pictures to look at (and there are tons) I have yet to find a decent community to discuss photography the way I want to discuss it. not that there aren't lots of places, but they all seem to use the old bbs-type mode of communication, being web-based forums using a terrible interface with horrid colors. I like mailing lists.
anyway, I know there are enough people here and around perl that are into photography - is there any interest in photo@perl.org or somesuch?
ORA put out digital photography hacks last year so we can kinda tie it into perl. and I spent way too much time getting set up in an all open source world, writing shell and perl scripts and figuring out life without photoshop, etc, so that might be a tie in too.
Re:I'm in
cog on 2005-03-18T15:33:45
Assuming it is created, of course:-) Re:I'm in
Matts on 2005-03-19T15:57:05
New list here
Re:I'd subscribe.
geoff on 2005-03-18T20:24:34
I don't know about reading raw from perl, but you might find my d70 on linux stuff helpful. and feel free to email me personally if you have any issues - I seem to have gotten to a comfortable spot, so I'm happy to help.Re:I'd subscribe.
Matts on 2005-03-18T21:23:11
I actually disagree with the setup described there, but I'm sure it's a matter of personal opinion. I'm using the ev3 curves instead of the P&S curves, along with the "I" colour space, and different adjustments to those specified in your links.
Since I'm a mac user I don't *need* all the fancy stuff, but what I would really like is when I download my RAW files to have something automatically see those files, convert them to smaller jpegs, and upload (via rsync) them to my pics website. I'm working on something using IO::KQueue, dcraw and neftags2jpg to do that now.
I could just create a mailing list off ml.sergeant.org/axkit.org if it would be easier.Re:I'd subscribe.
geoff on 2005-03-18T21:46:50
ufraw is really much better than dcraw, primarily due to curve support and a batch mode. I didn't get the impression that it mattered which curve you were using, so maybe it will help
outside of that, I'm pretty much shooting in raw+basic lately - the d70 is plenty fast, even in that mode, and it saves me the trouble of post-processing every picture we want to print so I can save my tuits on the good ones.Re:I'd subscribe.
Matts on 2005-03-18T22:14:22
(I guess we really should be discussing this on the mailing list wherever it ends up...)
I'm not up on the curve support thing yet - is the in-camera curve only applied if you shoot JPEG?
As far as batch mode goes, dcraw is command line only, and the command line *is* my batch mode:-) Re:I'd subscribe.
geoff on 2005-03-18T23:06:49
yes, the in-camera curves are only applied to jpeg - raw is your digital negative so you apply things to it, but the raw file itself is never altered. the advantage of having the curve in-camera is for things like the below.
wrt dcraw and the command line, yup, that's what I used to do. the thing is ufraw allows you to easily batch process things like white-balance, in-camera curves, and other similar aspects (from the command line, obviously). which basically means you can shoot just in raw and process the raw image just like the camera would have rendered the jpeg. essentially, in my mind, raw then becomes risk-free - you can get the in camera jpeg back even if you didn't create it. unfortunately, I tried this with dcraw and it just wasn't flexible enough. ufraw is also a fantastic gimp plug in, but if you use photoshop or nikon capture that doesn't matter.
a good resource for all of this is here which you've probably already seen. if you follow some of the links on my page you will stumble upon discussions of in-camera versus out-of-camera curve applications. the results are basically that it doesn't matter where you apply the curve.
see, a mailing list would be great:)
