Hi Florian, Long time no see ;)
Besides that, exif data holds "default crop size" of 6000x4000 pixels. That seems to be applied for DNG for you. I also assume those extra pixels are there for lens correction, since it's the same on a6x00 series cameras without IBIS they also have 6048pixel wide raw images. Maybe messing with exif information helps (i.e. change default crop values), or double check that DNG exif holds both info as well (image width + default crop), and if it does, file a bug that darktable applies the exif crop for DNG but not for Sony ARW. Otherwise it could be a bug of Adobe DNG converter to not honour the actual resolution (or applies lens correction!?). hth Mike Florian Pressler <[email protected]> schrieb am Sa., 20. Apr. 2019, 21:42: > Hello! > > I am currently re-designing by photo-workflow and my plan so far is to > convert the RAW-files from my Sony camera (which produces Sony's RAW, ARW) > to DNG-format (which is Adobe's RAW). I use Adobe's "Digital Negative > Converter" tool for that. > > I am now testing my new workflow, using Darktable as the tool to generate > the JPGs out from the RAWs. While testing, I found one distinction between > the original RAW-files from my Sony and the DNG-files which surprised me a > lot and keeps confusing me - I couldn't find a proper explanation for it. > > --> It seems that all my pictures I generate from the converted DNG-files > are slightly cropped. Just slightly, but visible. To test and verify that, > I exported JPGs from the different RAW formats with darktable. I did not > apply any modules to them (so not cropping, changing parameters etc, just > exporting JPGs from the RAW data). The JPGs from DNG are slightly cropped. > > From what I read, the original RAW-data should be untouched by the > conversion tool. It's just the format of the file itself, storage of > metadata etc which changes. > > Testfiles: > https://web.fp.ong.at/FPS08962.ARW > https://web.fp.ong.at/FPS08962.DNG > > Further investigation shows that darktable reports the ARW file with > dimensions 6048/4024, while it "should" have 6000/4000. Are the extra > pixels in the ARW-file kind of a buffer for in-body-stabilization? Where do > they come from, and why do they disappear in the converted DNG-file? > > Regards, > Florian > > ____________________________________________________________________________ > darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to > [email protected] > ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
