On 13.11.2020 19.36, Andy Dodd wrote:
As to Canon - the problem is no longer them. The issues that have been
raised by the exiv2 team aren't Canon-specific with ISOBMFF, and in fact so
far have been bogus.
The only cases where Canon themselves might be problematic are reading the
actual CR3
As to Canon - the problem is no longer them. The issues that have been
raised by the exiv2 team aren't Canon-specific with ISOBMFF, and in fact so
far have been bogus.
The only cases where Canon themselves might be problematic are reading the
actual CR3 codec - but guess what, that code is
On 13.11.2020 15.45, Hubert Kowalski wrote:
Sure, I could send a request to Canon.
Point is to do the request politelly and explain that you use free/open
source software, just to make canon aware of growing userbase that wants
their cameras supported.
Are you being more cautious about the
> Sure, I could send a request to Canon.
Point is to do the request politelly and explain that you use free/open
source software, just to make canon aware of growing userbase that wants
their cameras supported.
> implement support for CR3 in an open source image processing software
All we
From what I've been following the issue, it's a problem of some of the
exiv2 maintainers fearing legal repercussions. These legal repercussions
don't seem to actually be very likely, but this is still something that
needs to be hashed out in exiv2's kitchen before darktable can do
anything
On 12.11.2020 21.59, Hubert Kowalski wrote:
Before you gave money to Canon, you could have checked the status of exiv2
and rawspeed.
Maybe I should have. But it's too late for that now. I also have a
collection of Canon lenses accumulated over the years, and while there
are mount adapters
