Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/10/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks Frank, that certainly makes sense that there would be no compelling reason to want to remove the vignette correction. This from the DP Review suggests that the correction is applied to the RAW files. "Know which lens is being used and apply some software correction - all new M series lenses now carry a six-bit code which allows the M8 to identify which lens is used and (optionally) apply a 'final stage' software based vignetting correction (for RAW images the lens used is simply recorded, no change is made)". I understand and agree that this will happen in the camera. Nevertheless, IF it was optional to apply when using RAW files, then if would be surprising if Photoshop for example, did not add an ability to do it their own way. We already have perspective correction ability in the latest Photoshop, for example. Corner dodging/burning is well established in plug-ins as well, for example Photokit. My speculation would be that the actual correction may be the same for whole groups of lenses. For example all of the fifties may be perfectly served by a single in-camera correction? As you said just wait until some production cameras get out there and we shall all see. Thanks Hoppy -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Frank Filippone Sent: Thursday, 12 October 2006 23:45 To: 'Leica Users Group' Subject: RE: [Leica] LHSA meeting in Wetzlar; Leica Camera AG Well, my thoughts are that the camera records the corrected data AS the RAW file. Yes, the EXIF may tell you which lens, but basically, the corrections are already done. I guess you could go backwards and un-correct in the computer, but why? Think of this as correcting a lens aberration. After the engineer has corrected out the aberration, why would you ever want to put it back in? Why would you allow the user to fiddle with the control? I think there is a more compelling reason to build it into the camera.... Then you do not need to hire some programmer to write a special add in for some ( or MANY !!!!) computer programs to make it actually work, then maintain that software for all eternity on all the platforms, and with several versions of SW revisions.... Given that this is the first ( and maybe only for the forseeable future) camera company to need or employ individual pixel gain calibration, it is not an easy job to convince PS to incorporate it into their program. It would need to be supported by Leica. Personally, this would be my reason to build it into the camera, if I were King. I have always thought that 6 bits, or 64 different algorithms sounded small for all the past lenses, plus all future lenses from Leica. If corrections were based upon FL, then you might need.. ( 14, 16, 18, 21, 24, 28, 35, 50 ) something like 8 different states for the indicator... not 64. If it were based upon angle of optical rays, then each lens design would require its own correction algorithm. 64 sounds small.... ( 14, 16, 18, 21 Tri-E, 21 SA, 21 Elmarit, 21 ASPH; 24 Elmarit, 24 ASPH, 28 Elmarit V1, V2, 28 ASPH Summicron, 28 ASPH Elmarit, 4 versions of the 35 Summicron, 3 versions of the 35 Summilux, ASPH versions of each, 10 versions of 50 Summicron and other F2, another 6 or so versions of the 50 Summilux, etc etc....) but maybe that is right... As soon as someone has a real life camera, this question will be quickly answered...... Frank Filippone red735i@earthlink.net _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information