It’s been noted that the Leica M8 saves its DNG files in a compressed form, reduced from 14-bit data to 8-bit. The lossy nature of this compression may be disturbing.
There turns out to be a way to enter the M8’s service mode and choose to output in an uncompressed raw format, not DNG. Then the trick is to use a software app to convert the raw file to a 16-bit DNG containing 14-bit data.
More info on this web site: http://m8raw2dng.de where there’s some brief info including the technique for entering the M8 Service Mode, and you can download the raw->DNG app for Windows, MacOSX or Linux.
Then... Do you like the ouput? Improved over the 8-bit results? Drawbacks?
There turns out to be a way to enter the M8’s service mode and choose to output in an uncompressed raw format, not DNG. Then the trick is to use a software app to convert the raw file to a 16-bit DNG containing 14-bit data.
More info on this web site: http://m8raw2dng.de where there’s some brief info including the technique for entering the M8 Service Mode, and you can download the raw->DNG app for Windows, MacOSX or Linux.
Then... Do you like the ouput? Improved over the 8-bit results? Drawbacks?
Lss
Well-known
Thanks for the heads up. I was following this when the first samples came out and was waiting for the Mac OSX tool. I will definitely try this out.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Funny experiment. Went out today to take photos of the morning mist and tried this setting. From a usability point of view this is inconvenient. Whenever the camera is switched off or goes to sleep you have to activate the RAW feature again in the service menu with this weird button action. The RAW files are double the size of the DNGs. If the camera has to process RAW+JPG (no RAW-only option available), then it takes much longer to write an image to the card. When you are at home you need the converter to build DNGs from the RAW and the JPGs. The DNGs have a strange and huge magenta color cast. In LR I have to tune the magenta/green slider in camera calibration to a value from -30 up to -70 to get rid of it. But still the colors are not what I know from the M8 so I have to learn again to get my colors from these files.
Maybe all the hassle was worth it if I could see an image quality improvement. When someone expected smoother transitions between similar colors or something like that, a least I could not find this. I'm not going to use this setting again.
Maybe all the hassle was worth it if I could see an image quality improvement. When someone expected smoother transitions between similar colors or something like that, a least I could not find this. I'm not going to use this setting again.
ray*j*gun
Mentor
Sounds like a nightmare......
jarski
Mentor
nice to know this is at least possible, if not very usable and convenient.
edit: seems the project is still in early phase, perhaps raw files can be improved in coming versions.
edit: seems the project is still in early phase, perhaps raw files can be improved in coming versions.
bla
Newbie
Hello RFF members & M8 owners,
I am the developer of mentioned tool and stumbled on this thread while checking if my page can be found by google.
It took a while for my account here to get activated so excuse me for not having answered earlier.
Allow me to address some of the issues mentioned by previous posters:
1.) the tool really is at a very early state. Give me some time and some input and I can improve it. Up till now I could only do my own testing with my M8 and one single lens.
2.) it is not convenient to set the auto-power down function and use the RAW+JPG option. You can either set the camera to always on or use the setting for a specific shooting where you want the maximum amount of data.
3.) I admit that there is more data to write but I tried it in continuous shooting mode and didn't notice a difference. The RAW file is acquired anyway so the longest time (I guess) is used for the JPG conversion. I would really like to shoot RAW only...
4.) I myself am a Lightroom user so I am aware of the issue with the color cast and I am working on it. The problem mainly is that lightroom treats the files as if they were standard M8 raw files which they are not.
I would recommend for everyone who is interested to try for themselves. I am not saying that my tool is the only option to make nice photos with a M8 or that it will turn your M8 into a M240 but I think there is some potential.
Feel free to try for yourself. Don't be worried, it's not a nightmare (I would have released on Halloween then )
Greetings,
Arvid
I am the developer of mentioned tool and stumbled on this thread while checking if my page can be found by google.
It took a while for my account here to get activated so excuse me for not having answered earlier.Allow me to address some of the issues mentioned by previous posters:
1.) the tool really is at a very early state. Give me some time and some input and I can improve it. Up till now I could only do my own testing with my M8 and one single lens.
2.) it is not convenient to set the auto-power down function and use the RAW+JPG option. You can either set the camera to always on or use the setting for a specific shooting where you want the maximum amount of data.
3.) I admit that there is more data to write but I tried it in continuous shooting mode and didn't notice a difference. The RAW file is acquired anyway so the longest time (I guess) is used for the JPG conversion. I would really like to shoot RAW only...
4.) I myself am a Lightroom user so I am aware of the issue with the color cast and I am working on it. The problem mainly is that lightroom treats the files as if they were standard M8 raw files which they are not.
I would recommend for everyone who is interested to try for themselves. I am not saying that my tool is the only option to make nice photos with a M8 or that it will turn your M8 into a M240 but I think there is some potential.
Feel free to try for yourself. Don't be worried, it's not a nightmare (I would have released on Halloween then
)Greetings,
Arvid
user237428934
User deletion pending
Hello RFF members & M8 owners,
I am the developer of mentioned tool and stumbled on this thread while checking if my page can be found by google.
Allow me to address some of the issues mentioned by previous posters:
1.) the tool really is at a very early state. Give me some time and some input and I can improve it. Up till now I could only do my own testing with my M8 and one single lens.
2.) it is not convenient to set the auto-power down function and use the RAW+JPG option. You can either set the camera to always on or use the setting for a specific shooting where you want the maximum amount of data.
3.) I admit that there is more data to write but I tried it in continuous shooting mode and didn't notice a difference. The RAW file is acquired anyway so the longest time (I guess) is used for the JPG conversion. I would really like to shoot RAW only...
4.) I myself am a Lightroom user so I am aware of the issue with the color cast and I am working on it. The problem mainly is that lightroom treats the files as if they were standard M8 raw files which they are not.
I would recommend for everyone who is interested to try for themselves. I am not saying that my tool is the only option to make nice photos with a M8 or that it will turn your M8 into a M240 but I think there is some potential.
Feel free to try for yourself. Don't be worried, it's not a nightmare (I would have released on Halloween then
Greetings,
Arvid
Hello Arvid,
I apreciate your work but during my tests I didn't find an evidence for a benefit in the uncompressed files. It may be that I was looking at the wrong places or my outdoor test environment was not sufficient
Do you have some examples or can you explain scenarios where the uncompressed file shows advantages?
bla
Newbie
Hi Tom,
This is what I try to find out myself and what I hope users testing the files will decide. It is hard to say right now because as long as the raw converters do not handle the files correctly you won't get the best possible result in postprocessing.
I have gotten feedback where people noticed different noise pattern in the shadows & more detail.
Personally I think that my PC and a good software should be better than the processor in my 7 year old M8. So this is what I try to achieve. Make it better. I just can't say how far I can push the limit.
I appreciate your feedback even though it was originally not directed at me and I encourage other interested M8 users to make their own "funny experiments" and report so I can lean back if they are happy or fix issues that they found. I simply don't have the time and possibilities to develop and test every possible situation at the same time so I am dependent on user feedback.
Visit my site m8raw2dng.de
Happy shooting and long live your M8
Arvid
PS: I just noticed I forgot an important aspect: you shouldn't use any other ISO than base-ISO 160 when shooting RAW. All the other ISO values are derived from the base-ISO acquisition and do not provide any additional information but throw away some information. I plan to explain this more detailed in the information section on my page soon.
This is what I try to find out myself and what I hope users testing the files will decide. It is hard to say right now because as long as the raw converters do not handle the files correctly you won't get the best possible result in postprocessing.
I have gotten feedback where people noticed different noise pattern in the shadows & more detail.
Personally I think that my PC and a good software should be better than the processor in my 7 year old M8. So this is what I try to achieve. Make it better. I just can't say how far I can push the limit.
I appreciate your feedback even though it was originally not directed at me and I encourage other interested M8 users to make their own "funny experiments" and report so I can lean back if they are happy or fix issues that they found. I simply don't have the time and possibilities to develop and test every possible situation at the same time so I am dependent on user feedback.
Visit my site m8raw2dng.de
Happy shooting and long live your M8
Arvid
PS: I just noticed I forgot an important aspect: you shouldn't use any other ISO than base-ISO 160 when shooting RAW. All the other ISO values are derived from the base-ISO acquisition and do not provide any additional information but throw away some information. I plan to explain this more detailed in the information section on my page soon.
jarski
Mentor
nice job Arvid! hope you get help and feedback from M8 users!
willie_901
Mentor
...
PS: I just noticed I forgot an important aspect: you shouldn't use any other ISO than base-ISO 160 when shooting RAW. All the other ISO values are derived from the base-ISO acquisition and do not provide any additional information but throw away some information. I plan to explain this more detailed in the information section on my page soon.
This the case for many cameras. Using ISO above base ISO has no real advantage. However many Canon cameras actually benefit from increased ISO with regard to shadow noise. This has to do with the odd ADCs Canon uses in those bodies.
bla
Newbie
Hello M8 users @rff,
I created the next release version. The magenta color cast is now gone (in almost all cases) and there are some nice additional features (like creating your own lens database for correct exif)
Feel free to test and report your findings!
Arvid
I created the next release version. The magenta color cast is now gone (in almost all cases) and there are some nice additional features (like creating your own lens database for correct exif)
Feel free to test and report your findings!
Arvid
peterm1
Mentor
I am genuinely confused. Neither this thread nor the linked web site explain what this software is, how it is used or what it does. It seems like a secret that I am not privvy to. Can someone do the right thing and explain please.
Hi Peter - The M8 captures raw data in 14 bits, does a little pre-processing according to presets for specific lenses, then compresses the result into an 8 bit DNG, saved to the SD card. Unlike the M240, this is a "lossy" compression. So some data is discarded before the file is even saved, and one might wonder if there could be a way of getting a full 14 bit file... somehow. And if that file's extra data is a visible improvement.
Therefore this thread and Arvid's software hack. With the 14 bit raw capture file obtained through the service mode selection, the software intelligently converts this raw data to a 16 bit DNG that we can further process as normal.
Therefore this thread and Arvid's software hack.
With the 14 bit raw capture file obtained through the service mode selection, the software intelligently converts this raw data to a 16 bit DNG that we can further process as normal.user237428934
User deletion pending
I found all information buried in some pages when I tried it. The tool takes the .JPG and .RAW files and makes .DNG files from it that you can load into LR or every other raw converter. It does not work without the .JPG files so don't delete them before you converted.
It's a command line tool. Download it and make it available somewhere in a system path.
How you call it is described in Information -> Tool parameters.
I opened a system command box, navigated to the directory with the image files and I think I started it without any parameter (m8raw2dng). After it is ready you find the DNG-files in that directory
jarski
Mentor
not owning M8 currently, would love to see results. images processed with this tool.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Did some quick test shots from a tripod and applied the new version of the converter tool. When you apply the -c option then the magenta cast is gone because LR does not apply certain M8 specific settings. Now both files look very similar.
At infinte I still can't see a difference in the details at 100%. In the indoor shots I saw some subtle differences in the noise patterns on a wall (only visible at 100%). You have to search hard for it to see it so it's not really relevant for practical use.
But an amazing thing happened. The original M8 files are 3916x2634 pixels. That's not exactly 3:2. The converted files are 3964x2642 pixels (more like 3:2) and there is more content in the file, not just a black frame. What happened here? There seems to be a bit more on the sensor and Leica (or LR?) cropped it away in the original files?
At infinte I still can't see a difference in the details at 100%. In the indoor shots I saw some subtle differences in the noise patterns on a wall (only visible at 100%). You have to search hard for it to see it so it's not really relevant for practical use.
But an amazing thing happened. The original M8 files are 3916x2634 pixels. That's not exactly 3:2. The converted files are 3964x2642 pixels (more like 3:2) and there is more content in the file, not just a black frame. What happened here? There seems to be a bit more on the sensor and Leica (or LR?) cropped it away in the original files?
My (possibly incomplete) understanding is the output of these "extra" rows and columns of edge pixels are used when calculating the RGB readings from the Bayer filter array. But, being near the edge of the sensor chip, they don't get the full benefit of the averaging themselves, and the averaging then for them is incomplete. So, while the readings from these photo sites are used to help averaging neighboring inboard pixels, they themselves don't have complete information and they are not saved to the DNG.
I think the difference in the pixel count is reflected in the camera's specs and the term "effective pixels".
It would be interesting to see if the "extra" columns and rows saved in the 14-bit raw file show any difference in color or other attribute compared to others just inboard of them. See anything there, Tom?
rivercityrocker
Well-known
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
As far as I am aware the M9 uses the same compression as the M8 does. The Typ 240 uses a truly lossless compression.Hi Peter - The M8 captures raw data in 14 bits, does a little pre-processing according to presets for specific lenses, then compresses the result into an 8 bit DNG, saved to the SD card. Unlike the M9, this is a "lossy" compression. So some data is discarded before the file is even saved, and one might wonder if there could be a way of getting a full 14 bit file... somehow. And if that file's extra data is a visible improvement.
Therefore this thread and Arvid's software hack.
Wups, my error, Jaap... Confusion arises as I just got a M240 and sold my M9!
Doug
Doug