switching on and off DNG rendering for individual images

[myotis]

With PM5 you could switch raw rendering off and on with the "Q" shortcut key (I'm on a Mac).  Can you do something similar in PM6 with the DNG rendering of Raws, or is it working in the background all the time?  I can only find instructions on how to install and activate the DNG converter, but no description on how it works

I have suddenly come up against the issue of the embedded jpegs in ORF files being too poor quality to critically assess sharpness.  I assume the DNG convertor will help with this?  The description on the dialog box really only describes its value in integrating with changes made in Adobe products.

There is also an option to choose a "built-in Renderer", but as soon as I enable Raw Rendering, I am asked to install the DNG converter.

Very happy to just get pointed to appropriate instructions, or a previous answer on this. I haven't been able to find anything.

Thanks,

Graham

[Kirk Baker]

Graham,

With PM5 you could switch raw rendering off and on with the "Q" shortcut key (I'm on a Mac).  Can you do something similar in PM6 with the DNG rendering of Raws, or is it working in the background all the time?  I can only find instructions on how to install and activate the DNG converter, but no description on how it works

I have suddenly come up against the issue of the embedded jpegs in ORF files being too poor quality to critically assess sharpness.  I assume the DNG convertor will help with this?  The description on the dialog box really only describes its value in integrating with changes made in Adobe products.

There is also an option to choose a "built-in Renderer", but as soon as I enable Raw Rendering, I am asked to install the DNG converter.

Very happy to just get pointed to appropriate instructions, or a previous answer on this. I haven't been able to find anything.

The 'Q' key option is not in PM6.  The built-in Renderer was a technology that we were working on but didn't make it to a stage that provided enough quality or performance and has been turned off.

You might consider converting your ORF files to DNG.  They'll have very usable previews and will look the same in PM as they do in Adobe products.

-Kirk

[myotis]

The 'Q' key option is not in PM6.  The built-in Renderer was a technology that we were working on but didn't make it to a stage that provided enough quality or performance and has been turned off.

You might consider converting your ORF files to DNG.  They'll have very usable previews and will look the same in PM as they do in Adobe products.

Thanks Kirk, it would be nice if the "Q" key could be re-instated, checking sharpness is core tool for the rapid culling that I use PM for.

I don't especially want to convert ORFs to DNGs just to check the occasional image that needs a better quality image to check sharpness, and although some of my images go through Photoshop, most of my processing is in Capture One so previews looking as they do in Adobe products is of limited value to me. But I appreciate it will be of value to the majority of your users.

But I would have thought a bigger majority would want to assess sharpness in all their images, and I think this low-quality preview is a feature of Fuji and Sony as well as Olympus, so I look forward to hopefully your built in renderer might still become available.

Cheers,

Graham

[Kirk Baker]

Graham,

The 'Q' key option is not in PM6.  The built-in Renderer was a technology that we were working on but didn't make it to a stage that provided enough quality or performance and has been turned off.

You might consider converting your ORF files to DNG.  They'll have very usable previews and will look the same in PM as they do in Adobe products.

Thanks Kirk, it would be nice if the "Q" key could be re-instated, checking sharpness is core tool for the rapid culling that I use PM for.

Therein lies the problem.  We currently only have the ability to use the Adobe DNG Converter for rendering and it takes, on average, four seconds to convert a RAW file to DNG (which PM then extracts the preview from and deletes the converted file.)  So you're not going to get rapid culling if you have to stop and wait for four seconds to get your preview.

I don't especially want to convert ORFs to DNGs just to check the occasional image that needs a better quality image to check sharpness, and although some of my images go through Photoshop, most of my processing is in Capture One so previews looking as they do in Adobe products is of limited value to me. But I appreciate it will be of value to the majority of your users.

But I would have thought a bigger majority would want to assess sharpness in all their images, and I think this low-quality preview is a feature of Fuji and Sony as well as Olympus, so I look forward to hopefully your built in renderer might still become available.

Thanks for your feedback.

-Kirk

[myotis]

Therein lies the problem.  We currently only have the ability to use the Adobe DNG Converter for rendering and it takes, on average, four seconds to convert a RAW file to DNG (which PM then extracts the preview from and deletes the converted file.)  So you're not going to get rapid culling if you have to stop and wait for four seconds to get your preview.

Personally, I don't think I would mind the 4s wait if I have full control over when it happens, ie convert one or two images to  DNG, check the image(s) and then delete the DNGs.

it's only the occasional pair of images that need this level of scrutiny and at the moment I need to leave PM and open these images in a different program (fast Raw viewer), decide which is the sharper, and then go back to PM.

Or I identify the tricky images with a colour tag or rating then need to remember to complete the cull after  I've imported them into LR or C1.

But maybe it would end up a just as annoying as switching programs.

I've just realised I have the same problem with PM6 Plus, doesn't PM6 Plus use its own previews built while cataloguing, rather than the embedded preview?

Cheers,

Graham

[Kirk Baker]

Graham,

I've just realised I have the same problem with PM6 Plus, doesn't PM6 Plus use its own previews built while cataloguing, rather than the embedded preview?

Only when the original image cannot be located.  But no matter what, the preview is still going to come from the embedded JPEG in the ORF file.

-Kirk

[myotis]

Only when the original image cannot be located.  But no matter what, the preview is still going to come from the embedded JPEG in the ORF file.

Mmmm, why does PM plus build previews if it still uses the embedded Jpeg, is it just so you can work "offline". 

I thought the reason that databases build previews is so they can quickly preview a high-quality image without needing to render the raw every time you want to look at it.

Naively, isn't being able to use a "Q" key with PM6 Plus to flick between the embedded jpeg and the PM built preview a possible solution.

Cheers,

Graham

[Kirk Baker]

Graham,

Only when the original image cannot be located.  But no matter what, the preview is still going to come from the embedded JPEG in the ORF file.

Mmmm, why does PM plus build previews if it still uses the embedded Jpeg, is it just so you can work "offline".

Eventually, yes.

I thought the reason that databases build previews is so they can quickly preview a high-quality image without needing to render the raw every time you want to look at it.

Some other products may do this.  PM never directly renders RAW files.

Naively, isn't being able to use a "Q" key with PM6 Plus to flick between the embedded jpeg and the PM built preview a possible solution.

Sure, but it doesn't exist.  And it's very slow.

-Kirk

[myotis]

Some other products may do this.  PM never directly renders RAW files.

Interesting, so when PM is generating the database, it's just copying the embedded previews into the database.  I never thought of that, every other photo database I've used has built its own previews from the RAW, but of course, this takes time, and the program needs to be able to read the RAW file to create the previews.  But it does give very quick to load high-quality previews for every camera it supports.

Thanks, I've learnt something very useful about how PM6 Plus works.

Cheers,

Graham

[Hayo Baan]

Interesting, so when PM is generating the database, it's just copying the embedded previews into the database.  I never thought of that, every other photo database I've used has built its own previews from the RAW, but of course, this takes time, and the program needs to be able to read the RAW file to create the previews.  But it does give very quick to load high-quality previews for every camera it supports.

Hi Graham, I'm actually glad it does this; proper RAW rendering is hard and every program does it differently. So for PM to (yet again) throw in its own interpretation doesn't really make sense (especially considering speed). By using the embedded preview you at least get what was taken in-camera or, as with e.g. DNGs and NEFs edited with Nikon Capture, even the “final” result.

The only reason Camera Bits is working on rendering RAW is for those cameras that don't have a (decent) preview embedded in their raw files.

Cheers,
Hayo

[myotis]

Hi Graham, I'm actually glad it does this; proper RAW rendering is hard and every program does it differently. So for PM to (yet again) throw in its own interpretation doesn't really make sense (especially considering speed). By using the embedded preview you at least get what was taken in-camera or, as with e.g. DNGs and NEFs edited with Nikon Capture, even the “final” result.

The only reason Camera Bits is working on rendering RAW is for those cameras that don't have a (decent) preview embedded in their raw files.

Hello Hayo,

Some interesting comments, but I'm guessing we are coming from two very different places.

Firstly I'm personally not interested in seeing things as they come out of the camera. In terms of final images, every image gets a customised preset applied to it when imported into Capture One, so I'm only interested in the core things that will decide if a file is kept or deleted: exposure, sharpness, gestures and composition. Or at a later stage choose which files are good enough to progress to print or library. So the quality of raw rendering only needs to be good enough for me to be able to make those decisions.

With PM5, I was primarily using Nikons (still do) so this wasn't an issue but I also a Fuji X100s, which suffers from the same problems as the Olympus in terms of judging sharpness, but the "q" option in PM5 would instantly render the raw file and allow me to judge sharpness when this was needed. This did not noticeably slow down the culling.

I would like to do the same in PM6, but I got the suggestion from Kirk, that if I generated DNGs with PM6, PM would then "always" use the DNGs for viewing (as there is no q key to switch them on and off) and this would be slower than using the embedded Previews. I don't want that.

In practice, I just have Fast Raw Viewer set up as the default editor in PM6, and I can fairly quickly view a questionable file across in FRV. But it's not as convenient as pressing "q", and I can't do side by side comparison in FRV. 

So ideally, I would like PM6 Plus, to continue to use embedded jpegs by default, but also re-instate the "q" option, even if it meant moving the embedded jpegs "and" generating DNGs when building the catalogue. This could be a two-stage operation, with the embedded jpegs being available for immediate culling operations, and the DNGs being built in the background for more detailed assessment using the "q" key.  This becomes more important for me if using PM as a database and not just a culling tool.

As an aside, in other databases that generate their own optimised previews,  I haven't noticed them working any slower than PM6 Plus (but to be fair PM6 Plus is still in beta, so this may not be a fair comparison).

Cheers,

Graham

[Kirk Baker]

Graham,

Hi Graham, I'm actually glad it does this; proper RAW rendering is hard and every program does it differently. So for PM to (yet again) throw in its own interpretation doesn't really make sense (especially considering speed). By using the embedded preview you at least get what was taken in-camera or, as with e.g. DNGs and NEFs edited with Nikon Capture, even the “final” result.

The only reason Camera Bits is working on rendering RAW is for those cameras that don't have a (decent) preview embedded in their raw files.

Hello Hayo,

Some interesting comments, but I'm guessing we are coming from two very different places.

Firstly I'm personally not interested in seeing things as they come out of the camera. In terms of final images, every image gets a customised preset applied to it when imported into Capture One, so I'm only interested in the core things that will decide if a file is kept or deleted: exposure, sharpness, gestures and composition. Or at a later stage choose which files are good enough to progress to print or library. So the quality of raw rendering only needs to be good enough for me to be able to make those decisions.

With PM5, I was primarily using Nikons (still do) so this wasn't an issue but I also a Fuji X100s, which suffers from the same problems as the Olympus in terms of judging sharpness, but the "q" option in PM5 would instantly render the raw file and allow me to judge sharpness when this was needed. This did not noticeably slow down the culling.

I would like to do the same in PM6, but I got the suggestion from Kirk, that if I generated DNGs with PM6, PM would then "always" use the DNGs for viewing (as there is no q key to switch them on and off) and this would be slower than using the embedded Previews. I don't want that.

That's incorrect.  PM would use the embedded preview in the DNG.  It would be extremely fast.

-Kirk

[myotis]

That's incorrect.  PM would use the embedded preview in the DNG.  It would be extremely fast.

Sorry Kirk, I obviously misunderstood what you meant when you said "And it's very slow"

If it would be extremely fast I might give it a go.

Thanks,

Graham

[Kirk Baker]

Graham,

That's incorrect.  PM would use the embedded preview in the DNG.  It would be extremely fast.

Sorry Kirk, I obviously misunderstood what you meant when you said "And it's very slow"

If it would be extremely fast I might give it a go.

If you convert your ORF files to DNG, the DNG files will preview in Photo Mechanic extremely fast.  The slow case is turning on RAW rendering via the Adobe DNG Converter which PM is using as a RAW renderer.  If you're going to convert your ORF files to DNG and then stay with DNG, turn RAW rendering off in Photo Mechanic.  Then you'll only take the slow path once (the initial conversion to DNG).  All subsequent work with the DNGs in Photo Mechanic should be fast.

-Kirk

[myotis]

If you convert your ORF files to DNG, the DNG files will preview in Photo Mechanic extremely fast.  The slow case is turning on RAW rendering via the Adobe DNG Converter which PM is using as a RAW renderer.  If you're going to convert your ORF files to DNG and then stay with DNG, turn RAW rendering off in Photo Mechanic.  Then you'll only take the slow path once (the initial conversion to DNG).  All subsequent work with the DNGs in Photo Mechanic should be fast.

Thanks Kirk, but I'm slightly confused:

If I turn on DNG rendering "on" does it just render the raw as a DNG and then delete it, so it needs to render it again if I open that file again. Is that why that option is slow.

I assumed, that if I switched DNG rendering on (with PM6 Plus) that all files would have DNGs created and stored in the database. Having said that, rereading your other replies, I'm now not sure this is what happens.

So, Are you suggesting that I leave rendering switched off, but choose the convert ORFs into DNGs during ingest option, so I would end up with ORFs and DNGs sat beside each other in my file folders, and both being catalogued. If I did this is there some automatic way of only converting ORFs as I wouldn't want my NEFs converted.

But I confess, while I'm happy with the idea of DNGs inside the catalogue, I don't really want to clutter my hard drive with them. If I am going to end up with a second file (DNG) just to evaluate sharpness I wonder if taking a higher quality JPEG alongside the raw, might be a simpler process. I'm not sure how PM works with files that have a matching raw and JPEG, it's not something I've thought of before.

Or am I still misunderstanding this ?

Cheers,

Graham