On Sat, 2009-09-12 at 22:50 +0200, Sven Neumann wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-09-11 at 17:17 -0500, Leonard Evens wrote:
> > For years I have scanned negatives using vuescan, and then opened the
> > resulting tiff file in gimp without incident. But now something strange
> > has started happening. I scanned a b/w negative, and when I opened it,
> > it came up in ufraw and I had to fiddle with it in order to get it into
> > gimp. It wwas an noying and took a lot of time, and the image was not
> > the same as it appeared in Vuescan, which previously was always the
> > case. I don't understand why gimp is doing that.
> Sounds like ufraw has installed itself as a loader for TIFF images. To
> verify that you could look at your ~/.gimp-2.6/pluginrc and search for
> "tiff". You could even edit that file to remove the registration of the
> ufraw procedure for TIFF images.
I thought something like that was the problem. Thanks for helping me
find where to look. But there is still one thing I don't understand.
The problem doesn't happen with all tiff files, just with those created
by vuescan from a film scan. It doesn't have for example with a tiff
file created from a flatbed scan. So ufraw is somehow identifying
these tiff files as coming from a caera, which indirectly is true.
Leonard Evens <l...@math.northwestern.edu>
Mathematics Department, Northwestern University
Gimp-user mailing list