- #SONY RAW IMAGE CONVERTER HOW TO#
- #SONY RAW IMAGE CONVERTER MANUAL#
- #SONY RAW IMAGE CONVERTER FULL#
- #SONY RAW IMAGE CONVERTER SOFTWARE#
#SONY RAW IMAGE CONVERTER SOFTWARE#
"I want software that can choose proper settings like the camera does." Other answers produced inferior output for my use case) (The jpegs extracted by exiftool are lower resolution than the camera can process - but aside from that, the quality is the same, because they came from the camera. "I want software to do that and I want to have jpegs as good as camera can process" This software produces an identical effect to that of the camera's firmware, because it is extracting the output of that firmware.) "software (for Linux, eventually Windows) that helps me to have similar effect like auto in my camera (convert arw into jpeg)?" Which one would you want to see on a web page?Īlso, before you downvote this answer, note that the OP asked for: Output of ExifTool (originally 1616 x 1080): Output of DarkTable (originally 4288 x 2856): I decided to post this additional answer, because I figured I'm not the only web user who is willing to sacrifice resolution for color quality, and I wanted to make sure that the Marco's answer didn't get ignored or deleted. However, I guess Sony put a lot of work into their software. It's unfortunate that, at least in my case, the DarkTable default output is so much lower quality than whatever the software in the camera is producing.
#SONY RAW IMAGE CONVERTER MANUAL#
Perhaps for the future, I should read the user's manual and try to get the camera to save high-resolution JPEGs, but for my immediate needs, the exiftool extraction option produced a suitable resolution and far superior colors. The tool that I had been using is DarkTable, and the command-line is very simple: darktable-cli IN.ARW > OUT.jpg The other option for me, since I didn't want to use proprietary software, was suggestion to use the command line interface of a GUI tool. On my 14-year-old camera, the preview image extracted by ExifTool is 1616 x 1080, not quite the resolution of my monitor, but good enough for a web page.
#SONY RAW IMAGE CONVERTER FULL#
One of the other answers, by has a negative score, and that is the one that I ended up preferring: exiftool -b -PreviewImage IN.ARW > OUT.jpgĪs pointed out in the comments, this has the disadvantage of not preserving the full resolution of the image. It's the viewer that I used to batch-output my photos. Imaging Edge is actually three programs (viewer, editor and camera remote control). So, as Michael C says, try the Sony program and see what happens. Some looked ok at the regular size, but when I zoomed in on the photo, there were a LOT of extra color and pixels that distracted from the image. It was VERY slow, taking about 24 hours to convert the photos (it's hard to tell exactly how long, because my laptop kept sleeping after a few hours, and I'm not sure the processing was working in the background.) Also, the resulting photos were very 'noisy'. FastStone has some other options that could be tweaked that might make more of a difference, but I didn't play with them.įotor was not very good. The jpeg file sizes were much larger, around double the size. The quality was nearly indistinguishable. It was as fast, or nearly as fast, as Imaging Edge. I used the "Quality = 100" setting, everything else default. It's also reasonably fast, 500 pictures took around 30-40 minutes.įastStone Viewer was nearly as good.
#SONY RAW IMAGE CONVERTER HOW TO#
It's made by Sony and going by the logic that "Sony knows Sony", I trust that it knows how to work with it's own camera's images.
I've tried a small handful of programs so far- Imaging Edge, Fotor, FastStone Image Viewer. I recently found myself in the same situation, took some RAW shots, not RAW + Jpeg, and now have a ton of photos that I need to improve in order to show anyone.
0 kommentar(er)
