Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

Unfortunately not from my end. I have had a lot going on at work and home. Time to work on this has escaped me. I did manage to move my initial prototyping work over to github.com/google/tiff and update the LICENSE to match the Go license. So, this is where we can make changes or blow it all

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

Any updates on this? I'm looking at processing RAW images in a server with Go. On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 9:36:31 PM UTC-5, Jonathan Pittman wrote: > > Well me too! I am looking to see what level of interest there is in the > Go community to see this happen. I am also looking for people who

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

If you start in a separate repo, make sure you are checking CLAs all along the way (I can help you set that up if needed). Otherwise, any move into /x/image just becomes that much more difficult. And yes, I would definitely start with the standard Go license. On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:28 AM,

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Jonathan Pittman wrote: > Does the license need to be the same as the standard Go License if it starts > in another repo and then moves over? IANAL, but that seems best. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

Does the license need to be the same as the standard Go License if it starts in another repo and then moves over? On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Nigel Tao wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Jonathan Pittman > wrote: > > To

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Jonathan Pittman wrote: > To everyone, I really want to see this live in the golang.org/x/image repo. > Do we need to create a formal proposal for it to live there? Should we do > the initial development in another repo and then

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

Klaus, thank you for your input and pointing us to RawSpeed. I glanced through it and noticed one of the approaches you take is to create decoders based on the "format" and use camera Make/Model tags to decide which decoder to use. I am glad to say this is also the approach I was taking and

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 8:06:44 PM UTC+2, Klaus Post wrote: > > On Saturday, 13 August 2016 17:18:16 UTC+2, Paul wrote: >> >> From what I gather even Adobe uses [dcraw]. >> > > I am pretty sure it is the other way around. Observing for years, it seems > like dc is reverse engineering

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

I don't know what the true story actually is, however some camera hardware makers such as Nikon are giving software developers a tough time by intentionally obfuscating their metadata. A lot of folks had big problems with that including adobe. I just mentioned "reverse engineering" to indicate

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

On Saturday, 13 August 2016 17:22:29 UTC+2, Peter Herth wrote: > > Having a parallel version of the raw converter could yield conversion > times far faster then the original C. And it would be a neat Go library to > have. > For the biggest part, I would not expect you to be able to beat C

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

On Saturday, 13 August 2016 17:18:16 UTC+2, Paul wrote: > > From what I gather even Adobe uses [dcraw]. > I am pretty sure it is the other way around. Observing for years, it seems like dc is reverse engineering the Adobe DNG Converter. His color conversion matrices are definitely from that,

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

On Wednesday, 27 July 2016 04:36:31 UTC+2, Jonathan Pittman wrote: > > Well me too! I am looking to see what level of interest there is in the > Go community to see this happen. I am also looking for people who are > interested in working on this. > (a bit late to the party) I am the author

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

Dcraw seems to be only partially gpl - otherwise Adobe couldn't use it in its products. Having a parallel version of the raw converter could yield conversion times far faster then the original C. And it would be a neat Go library to have. Peter On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 5:18 PM, 'Paul' via

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

Sorry, I didn't see your longer high-level overview post--I see the vision a bit more clearly now. Have you used slack? It might be a good place to start discussion to hammer out some details before moving onto a google doc. I find shared google docs can be challenging without at least a

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

As one would want a clean Go library, I think this library should be implemented from scratch in Go - there is also a better chance to get a really good performing library, if it is designed in Go and not in C. One obvious thing is, to do all heavy computations in parallel via goroutines.

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

Maybe not an organization on github, not for just this. I could see a google group, but I am not sure about that either. We have golang-nuts already. On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Guy Allard wrote: > For how to go about discussion: > > would a google group work? > >

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

For how to go about discussion: would a google group work? Or possibly an organization on github? Personally I could go with almost anything. On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 11:09:12 PM UTC-4, Jonathan Pittman wrote: > > For some reason I did not get the last 3 updates until this one.

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

I'm not familiar with the process nor with the tools that were used, but I guess there are people on this list who may be able to point you to those. I suppose if it was feasible for something as large and complex as a compiler, it should be much easier for comparatively smaller pieces of

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

A lot of people would love to see that happen, not for the sake of this situation, but for the sake of being able to translate C to Go in moderately large projects and general uses. If you or someone else has a way to do that, then that would be very interesting to see. Having said that, I think

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

For some reason I did not get the last 3 updates until this one. Weird. So, I have looked over a number of packages that parse tiff files. While, at the most basic level, they all have to do the same sort of things, each one also approaches the situation a little differently. And more so,

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

I would be interested in seeing this happen. On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 7:36:31 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Pittman wrote: > > Well me too! I am looking to see what level of interest there is in the > Go community to see this happen. I am also looking for people who are > interested in working on

[go-nuts] Re: Who wants to use Go to process your camera's raw files?

If you put something up on github, please let us know here. On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 10:36:31 PM UTC-4, Jonathan Pittman wrote: > > Well me too! I am looking to see what level of interest there is in the > Go community to see this happen. I am also looking for people who are > interested