Robert,

You have been "against" 360Cities for years, so I don't really find your post
meaningful, and I'll choose not to reply to it.

But let me ask, why the emotion? Have I somehow inconvenienced you in the past
by building a company? The fact is I have dedicated a very significant chunk of
my life to popularize and bring 360º photography closer to the mainstream. That
helps even you, Robert. Admit it :)

It seems a bit odd that even such a rather innocuous post that I made can incite
such basement-dwelling, spittle-flecked growls from people such as yourself. I
don't know why. But it is the (increasingly) unpleasant side of this List.

Let me ask you again - you're among the first to critize me and my company, but
never to made any meaningful suggestion as to how we might do something
differently - and certainly I have never heard any hint from you that we might
be doing something *right*, which I find rather sad.


Jeffrey



--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "robert" <image360@...> wrote:
>
> Haaaaaaa....! :)
>
> best stupid joke I've heard in a very long time.
>
> how much money, $0
>
> Let's see some numbers?
>
> Posting for free makes NO sense if you're a pro, others may find some
satisfaction.
>
> But significant print or referral work from any online site is a pipe dream
best taken with a lottery ticket. Just not going happen.
>
> If you're a pro you have to market, yourself, endlessly, all the time, twice
over. 360citites and others like it are basically a waste of time/effort. You
simply get lost in the crowd if they even find you.
>
> If you're a pro or advanced amateur and either have and/or are producing a lot
of high quality images send me a private email.
> I may have a way to get you real value for your work.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Robert
>

Jimbo,

does this mean that I need to use even the same *exposure* ?

What about using bracketing, and creating and HDR file? Or is this overkill?



--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "mrjimbo" <mrjimbo@...> wrote:
>

>
> Yes a quality enlarger lens is superior..they are flat field and have the best
edge to edge sharpness... The best of these are no longer in production..
Schneider Krummps ( various versions ...some are better then others)
>
> Using an IT8.. or a hutch target ...Shoot that then using color management
software build a custom profile.. When you do this you don't want to change any
settings when you shoot all the slides you'll want to use the same as used to
shoot the target including all light settings etc .. you would use this as your
input profile.. Far better then using your camera profile as it's dilaed in for
the Bowens and your camera workng together..

Well, I'll hop in here since I'm a pro on 360Cities. I just got a deposit in
my account this morning for more than $100 and next month, based on what I
have so far in AdSense, it will be just over $200.

I have 254 panos published, but to be fair, five of those are of the World
Trade Center taken back in 2000. I've had a LOT of traffic on those lately.
However, my most popular pano is this one with over 200,000 views:

http://www.360cities.net/image/radio-city-music-hall#0.00,0.00,70.0

So, did I get a bump with the recent 9/11 10th anniversary? Almost
certainly. Will it continue - we'll see. The thing is, as Jeffrey has
pointed out, once I published these panos, (and got smart enough to set up
AdSense properly...), I started generating revenue.

I went over a year without setting up AdSense on my account, so I probably
left a bit of money on the table. If you are interested, email me in another
month or two and I'll give you rough figures on my ongoing earnings. (I
think I'm not allowed to get too specific as per the AdSense TOS.)

Mark

www.northernlight.net
www.virtual-travels.com
www.pinnacle-vr.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of prague
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 8:19 AM
> To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Re: I'm making more than $1000 / year with my panos
> *without doing anything*
>
>
>
> Robert,
>
> You have been "against" 360Cities for years, so I don't really find your
> post meaningful, and I'll choose not to reply to it.
>
> But let me ask, why the emotion? Have I somehow inconvenienced you in the
> past by building a company? The fact is I have dedicated a very
> significant chunk of my life to popularize and bring 360º photography
> closer to the mainstream. That helps even you, Robert. Admit it :)
>
> It seems a bit odd that even such a rather innocuous post that I made can
> incite such basement-dwelling, spittle-flecked growls from people such as
> yourself. I don't know why. But it is the (increasingly) unpleasant side
> of this List.
>
> Let me ask you again - you're among the first to critize me and my
> company, but never to made any meaningful suggestion as to how we might do
> something differently - and certainly I have never heard any hint from you
> that we might be doing something *right*, which I find rather sad.
>
>
> Jeffrey
>
>
>
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "robert" <image360@...> wrote:
> >
> > Haaaaaaa....! :)
> >
> > best stupid joke I've heard in a very long time.
> >
> > how much money, $0
> >
> > Let's see some numbers?
> >
> > Posting for free makes NO sense if you're a pro, others may find some
> satisfaction.
> >
> > But significant print or referral work from any online site is a pipe
> dream best taken with a lottery ticket. Just not going happen.
> >
> > If you're a pro you have to market, yourself, endlessly, all the time,
> twice over. 360citites and others like it are basically a waste of
> time/effort. You simply get lost in the crowd if they even find you.
> >
> > If you're a pro or advanced amateur and either have and/or are producing
> a lot of high quality images send me a private email.
> > I may have a way to get you real value for your work.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Robert
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> --
>
>
>

Also of note: Slideshare has rebuilt their site in HTML5 & w/o Flash-based
delivery. Bandwidth apparently much improved.

http://t.co/CvKiXyvd

(topical, if not panoramic)

--
Patrick Cheatham
patrick@...

Portfolio: http://patrickcheatham.com
Facebook: http://tinyurl.com/360-degree-photos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/patrickcheatham

What is the Flash Version required for your panos Hans?

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans" <hans@...> wrote:
>
> This might be of interest in the discussion on HTML5
>
> I checked my exit links and discovered that among the last 10000 entries ( 12
hours) on my Statcounter I had 453 on the get flashplayer link you get if you do
not have it installed.
>
> This is 4.5% of the visits so I got curious to see what system and browser
they had.
>
> It turned out that almost all was Windows , from XP to vista and Win7 and
browsers  IE6 to IE9.
> I found 4 Android which my stats shows are 1.13 % of the visitors but not a
single Mac among them.
> There was  11.4 % Mac visits so this surprises me as everyone is associating
Mac users with Flash haters and they do not even have it installed when you buy
a Mac today.
> It can not be explained that they actually can see my last content in Safari
without Flash because that does not work automatically on my pages.
>
> Hans
>

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "enridp" <enridp@...> wrote:
>
> What is the Flash Version required for your panos Hans?

KRPano supports Flash 9.

I just got confirmation from Klaus that the automatic detection for  HTML5 if no
Flash does not work on the version I use.
It does now work on the new release that was posted a couple of months ago.
But only for Safari, Chrome is just working too bad to make it usable.
Actually I can see that he also updated the Google Maps plugin for Flash 9 so it
is still Flash 9 compatible.

Hans

>
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans" <hans@> wrote:
> >
> > This might be of interest in the discussion on HTML5
> >
> > I checked my exit links and discovered that among the last 10000 entries (
12 hours) on my Statcounter I had 453 on the get flashplayer link you get if you
do not have it installed.
> >
> > This is 4.5% of the visits so I got curious to see what system and browser
they had.
> >
> > It turned out that almost all was Windows , from XP to vista and Win7 and
browsers  IE6 to IE9.
> > I found 4 Android which my stats shows are 1.13 % of the visitors but not a
single Mac among them.
> > There was  11.4 % Mac visits so this surprises me as everyone is associating
Mac users with Flash haters and they do not even have it installed when you buy
a Mac today.
> > It can not be explained that they actually can see my last content in Safari
without Flash because that does not work automatically on my pages.
> >
> > Hans
> >
>

Jeffery,

I'm not now nor have I ever been against 360cities. I'm for it, actually, and
wish you nothing but success.

But I'm also not a free business consultant, nor do I think there is any emotion
in my comments.

You said yourself in a another post that you consider the forum an open
opportunity for entertainment. So smile, laugh a bit and understand that just
because someone may disagree with you or your approach does not mean they are
against you.

On the contrary, the best critic of your work may be your best friend.

Cheers,

Robert


--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "prague" <panoramas@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Robert,
>
> You have been "against" 360Cities for years, so I don't really find your post
meaningful, and I'll choose not to reply to it.
>
> But let me ask, why the emotion? Have I somehow inconvenienced you in the past
by building a company? The fact is I have dedicated a very significant chunk of
my life to popularize and bring 360º photography closer to the mainstream. That
helps even you, Robert. Admit it :)
>
> It seems a bit odd that even such a rather innocuous post that I made can
incite such basement-dwelling, spittle-flecked growls from people such as
yourself. I don't know why. But it is the (increasingly) unpleasant side of this
List.
>
> Let me ask you again - you're among the first to critize me and my company,
but never to made any meaningful suggestion as to how we might do something
differently - and certainly I have never heard any hint from you that we might
be doing something *right*, which I find rather sad.
>
>
> Jeffrey
>
>
>
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "robert" <image360@> wrote:
> >
> > Haaaaaaa....! :)
> >
> > best stupid joke I've heard in a very long time.
> >
> > how much money, $0
> >
> > Let's see some numbers?
> >
> > Posting for free makes NO sense if you're a pro, others may find some
satisfaction.
> >
> > But significant print or referral work from any online site is a pipe dream
best taken with a lottery ticket. Just not going happen.
> >
> > If you're a pro you have to market, yourself, endlessly, all the time, twice
over. 360citites and others like it are basically a waste of time/effort. You
simply get lost in the crowd if they even find you.
> >
> > If you're a pro or advanced amateur and either have and/or are producing a
lot of high quality images send me a private email.
> > I may have a way to get you real value for your work.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Robert
> >
>

You know, Bower, Rokinon, Vivitar etc???

Having organized contact sheets is even more important as the number of images
increases. However, you approach this you need a system to catalog the images
from the digital proofs to the physical copies. Otherwise you will spend hours
looking for the slide you want.

I would suggest the same approach here, just put n number of slides onto a
flatbed scanner, scan at a relatively low res, print it, label it, take that set
of slides and put them in sleeves. Then put all the contact prints and matching
slides in the same container.

Good Luck,

Robert

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "prague" <panoramas@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Robert, yes I know :) that was for my dad. Different situation, and
much fewer slides. This time there are more slides and none of them are in
sleeves.
>
>
>
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "robert" <image360@> wrote:
> >
> > Seems like we've been here before, did this not work?
> >
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/message/43969
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Robert
> >
> > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Jeffrey Martin <panoramas@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I have taken possession of my grandfather's slides. Around 10,000 of them,
I
> > > guess. Spanning 4 decades or so. Images from many different countries.
> > > Mostly kodachrome. Shot with a leica rangefinder camera. Stored in a
cabinet
> > > in a basement all this time, under very good climate control.
> > >
> > > I've come to the following conclusions:
> > >
> > > 1) I don't trust anyone else in the family to store these :-O Someone
might
> > > stick them in a hot attic or something.
> > > 2) Commercial scanning services cost too much for an inferior resultt.
> > > 3) Scanning all these "the right way" professionally will be WAY too
> > > expensive.
> > > 4) Scanning them at home "the right way" will take too long. I don't have
> > > _years_ of my life to devote to this, not yet anyway.
> > >
> > > Therefore I think I need to batch scan them at home. I have found two
> > > possibilities:
> > > 1) http://www.filmscanner.info/en/ReflectaDigitDia5000.html the Reflecta
> > > digit dia 5000
> > > 2) nikon coolscan 5000 with a slide feeder
> > > http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-SF-210-Slide-Feeder-Sf-210/dp/B0001AVVRA
> > >
> > > I will use either silverfast or vuescan software. After bulk scanning
> > > everything I'll be able to go back and rescan any masterpieces
individually
> > > as needed.
> > >
> > > Have I made any incorrect assumptions above? Can anyone advise something I
> > > might have missed? I guess that even scanning them in bulk like this might
> > > take a couple of years of my spare time, but I'm willing to do that.
> > >
> > > Oh, and yes, I hope to start a blog with all these images ;)
> > >
> >
>

So what's your point here Dave?

CirclePix and Obeo are both high volume low end real estate for sale
"photography" companies that work nationally. While I have no idea what they pay
now, a couple of years ago it could be as low as $12.50 per property for 20+
stills and 6+ mirror on a stick 360's.

Yes, hard to believe anyone would do this, but they do.

As I use to say, when I was competing against these companies long ago, I'm not
sure I would want to let someone so underpaid into my clients house if I was a
realtor. :)

cheers,

Robert



--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "texas360dave" <texas360dave@...> wrote:
>
> No I am not advertising... but this is the first unsolicited email I have
received regarding the Panorama industry.
>
> Quote: "call 866 dash 902 dash 3600"
>
> VPiX certified photographers make 200% to 400% MORE money than working for
Obeo or CirclePix. Why? Because we don't squeeze undesirable "middlemen" into
your territory. You work for yourself.
>
> Sign up for our monthly photographer package and you'll be exposed to
thousands of businesses that need HD panoramic services. And we'll send leads
right to your VPiX dashboard that you can bid on. "
>
> below the text is a green circle logo PLS  360 certified INTERNATIONAL
Photographer with a picture of a person with two camera strapped around their
neck.  No tripod or bracket.
>
> below that is a 'click here button with a banner that reads "Photographers
UNITED AGAINST Crappy Compensation Practices"
>
> below that
> " VPiX is so much better than Real Tour Vision. I get to produce floor to
ceiling tours now in HD resolution. My customers love it so much more than RTV
tours. "
> ©2011 VPIX(R) All Rights reserved
>

So 5% of your visitors doesn't have Flash 9? and they are not apple users?
That is really strange if we think in the 99% of penetration claimed by adobe.

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans" <hans@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "enridp" <enridp@> wrote:
> >
> > What is the Flash Version required for your panos Hans?
>
> KRPano supports Flash 9.
>
> I just got confirmation from Klaus that the automatic detection for  HTML5 if
no Flash does not work on the version I use.
> It does now work on the new release that was posted a couple of months ago.
> But only for Safari, Chrome is just working too bad to make it usable.
> Actually I can see that he also updated the Google Maps plugin for Flash 9 so
it is still Flash 9 compatible.
>
> Hans
>
> >
> > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans" <hans@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This might be of interest in the discussion on HTML5
> > >
> > > I checked my exit links and discovered that among the last 10000 entries (
12 hours) on my Statcounter I had 453 on the get flashplayer link you get if you
do not have it installed.
> > >
> > > This is 4.5% of the visits so I got curious to see what system and browser
they had.
> > >
> > > It turned out that almost all was Windows , from XP to vista and Win7 and
browsers  IE6 to IE9.
> > > I found 4 Android which my stats shows are 1.13 % of the visitors but not
a single Mac among them.
> > > There was  11.4 % Mac visits so this surprises me as everyone is
associating Mac users with Flash haters and they do not even have it installed
when you buy a Mac today.
> > > It can not be explained that they actually can see my last content in
Safari without Flash because that does not work automatically on my pages.
> > >
> > > Hans
> > >
> >
>

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "enridp" <enridp@...> wrote:
>
> So 5% of your visitors doesn't have Flash 9? and they are not apple users?
> That is really strange if we think in the 99% of penetration claimed by adobe.

Well it looks like my first stats was misleading.
My quota was only 10,000 and apparently the exit links are not updated in
proportion.
I updated to 25.000 and now also got abetter overview so that I could see the
dates and compare them to my  visitor stats.

This actually now gives me 1 % so Adobe is correct.

But what I said about Mac in low numbers is still true.
I only have 2 Macs among 100 hits. That is compared to 11% of the visitors,

Hans



>
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans" <hans@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "enridp" <enridp@> wrote:
> > >
> > > What is the Flash Version required for your panos Hans?
> >
> > KRPano supports Flash 9.
> >
> > I just got confirmation from Klaus that the automatic detection for  HTML5
if no Flash does not work on the version I use.
> > It does now work on the new release that was posted a couple of months ago.
> > But only for Safari, Chrome is just working too bad to make it usable.
> > Actually I can see that he also updated the Google Maps plugin for Flash 9
so it is still Flash 9 compatible.
> >
> > Hans
> >
> > >
> > > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans" <hans@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This might be of interest in the discussion on HTML5
> > > >
> > > > I checked my exit links and discovered that among the last 10000 entries
( 12 hours) on my Statcounter I had 453 on the get flashplayer link you get if
you do not have it installed.
> > > >
> > > > This is 4.5% of the visits so I got curious to see what system and
browser they had.
> > > >
> > > > It turned out that almost all was Windows , from XP to vista and Win7
and browsers  IE6 to IE9.
> > > > I found 4 Android which my stats shows are 1.13 % of the visitors but
not a single Mac among them.
> > > > There was  11.4 % Mac visits so this surprises me as everyone is
associating Mac users with Flash haters and they do not even have it installed
when you buy a Mac today.
> > > > It can not be explained that they actually can see my last content in
Safari without Flash because that does not work automatically on my pages.
> > > >
> > > > Hans
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Well it looks like my first stats was misleading.
My quota was only 10,000 and apparently the exit links are not updated in proportion.
I updated to 25.000 and now also got abetter overview so that I could see the dates and compare them to my visitor stats.
This actually now gives me 1 % so Adobe is correct.
But what I said about Mac in low numbers is still true.
I only have 2 Macs among 100 hits. That is compared to 11% of the visitors,

--

Scott Witte



414.345.9660
Member, IVRPA

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Scott Witte <scottw@...> wrote:
>
> Hans,
>
> Do you have stats on whether those exiting to get Flash had any version
> currently installed? If I remember correctly WinXP installs IE6 and
> Flash 7, for instance, even if you install it today. I expect that is
> sufficient to view most Flash content so some people would have no
> reason to update. By comparison, if a Mac user doesn't have Flash by
> default they would have reason to install it to view Flash content.
> Unless the computer is really old the version of Flash installed would
> be 9 or later. Just a guess.


There are 135 flashversions in my stats.
The first non 10 version is 9.r124 which comes in as No 16 with 0.56%
9.0 r115 has 0.21%

and all others are below 0.20%
There are some 6 versions which ad up as 0.45% together but Flash 7 is about
0.04%

Hans

>
> BTW, I never got the impression that Mac users are Flash haters.
>
> Scott
>
>
> On 9/29/2011 9:54 AM, Hans wrote:
> > Well it looks like my first stats was misleading.
> > My quota was only 10,000 and apparently the exit links are not updated in
proportion.
> > I updated to 25.000 and now also got abetter overview so that I could see
the dates and compare them to my  visitor stats.
> >
> > This actually now gives me 1 % so Adobe is correct.
> >
> > But what I said about Mac in low numbers is still true.
> > I only have 2 Macs among 100 hits. That is compared to 11% of the visitors,
>
> --
> Scott Witte
>
> <http://www.scottwitte.com>
> <http://www.tourdeforce360.com>
> 414.345.9660
> Member, IVRPA
>

Hi,

Has anybody had any luck faking out the latest DPP (ver 3.10+) lens corrections
for non-Canon lenses?

Trying to get CA for a Samyang 8mm.

Thanks,
David B

Am 30.09.2011 08:32, schrieb David:
> Has anybody had any luck faking out the latest DPP (ver 3.10+) lens
corrections for non-Canon lenses?
>
> Trying to get CA for a Samyang 8mm.

Yes. You need exiftool (best with exiftoolGUI) latest version. There you
can modify the Canon Makernotes (from Modify menu). I guess your camera
records 50mm as focal length for an adapted lens. Hence you must choose
a lens with this focal inside the range or change focal length to your
need.

I use the EF 24-70 f/2.8 for the Zenitar fisheye. You must find out for
yourself what works best for the Samyang, since Canon does a lens
specific CA pre-correction where you can fine tune the result only.

Give feedback once you are done...
--
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de

What about PTLens?  That used to work good for me.

Erik Krause wrote:
> Am 30.09.2011 08:32, schrieb David:
>> Has anybody had any luck faking out the latest DPP (ver 3.10+) lens
corrections for non-Canon lenses?
>>
>> Trying to get CA for a Samyang 8mm.
>
> Yes. You need exiftool (best with exiftoolGUI) latest version. There you
> can modify the Canon Makernotes (from Modify menu). I guess your camera
> records 50mm as focal length for an adapted lens. Hence you must choose
> a lens with this focal inside the range or change focal length to your
> need.
>
> I use the EF 24-70 f/2.8 for the Zenitar fisheye. You must find out for
> yourself what works best for the Samyang, since Canon does a lens
> specific CA pre-correction where you can fine tune the result only.
>
> Give feedback once you are done...

Am 30.09.2011 13:23, schrieb Ken Warner:
> What about PTLens?  That used to work good for me.

AFAIK PTLens doesn't do CA correction during raw conversion, which is
not optimal. However, I wonder whether my Samyang is different, since it
doesn't show visible CA...

--
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de

Maybe you got a really good one.

Erik Krause wrote:
> Am 30.09.2011 13:23, schrieb Ken Warner:
>> What about PTLens?  That used to work good for me.
>
> AFAIK PTLens doesn't do CA correction during raw conversion, which is
> not optimal. However, I wonder whether my Samyang is different, since it
> doesn't show visible CA...
>

If you have a high bright dark contrast sharply defined in any corner you don't
see any CA?  That would be pretty amazing and you should hang on to that lens.

David B

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
>
> Maybe you got a really good one.
>
> Erik Krause wrote:
> > Am 30.09.2011 13:23, schrieb Ken Warner:
> >> What about PTLens?  That used to work good for me.
> >
> > AFAIK PTLens doesn't do CA correction during raw conversion, which is
> > not optimal. However, I wonder whether my Samyang is different, since it
> > doesn't show visible CA...
> >
>

Maybe what you are referring to is the purple fringe?  That's different.

David wrote:
> If you have a high bright dark contrast sharply defined in any corner you
don't see any CA?  That would be pretty amazing and you should hang on to that
lens.
>
> David B
>
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
>> Maybe you got a really good one.
>>
>> Erik Krause wrote:
>>> Am 30.09.2011 13:23, schrieb Ken Warner:
>>>> What about PTLens?  That used to work good for me.
>>> AFAIK PTLens doesn't do CA correction during raw conversion, which is
>>> not optimal. However, I wonder whether my Samyang is different, since it
>>> doesn't show visible CA...
>>>
>
>
>

I tried PTlens in PSE, but I prefer the DPP raw correction.  I like doing my raw
processing in DPP and then exporting sets as a batch, which I can't do in
PSE/ACR.  ACR also ignores any processing I did on the raw in DPP so I would
loose all I do in DPP if I want to use ACR.

Also PTlens costs money for something I think I should already have access to.

There was an earlier thread that had stated the exif editing trick was no longer
working after DPP ver 3.10.x.  Is it possible to keep an old version of DPP
installed along with the current version? (Win7 64bit)  The Canon install update
the existing version so the old version is no longer there.

I have tried the exif editing trick with exiftoolGUI outlined by posts in
various places, but so far the lens correction still remains unavailable.  There
must be a way around this if we can just find it.

Anyone have a short length Canon lens that works you could post a raw sample of
so I could copy the exif?

Thanks.

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Erik Krause <erik.krause@...> wrote:
>
> Am 30.09.2011 13:23, schrieb Ken Warner:
> > What about PTLens?  That used to work good for me.
>
> AFAIK PTLens doesn't do CA correction during raw conversion, which is
> not optimal. However, I wonder whether my Samyang is different, since it
> doesn't show visible CA...
>
> --
> Erik Krause
> http://www.erik-krause.de
>

Do you mean the 8mm/3.5 Samyang?  I have the Bower version.


--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
>
> You know, Bower, Rokinon, Vivitar etc???
>

No, the new 7.5mm small MFT one....

David wrote:
> Do you mean the 8mm/3.5 Samyang?  I have the Bower version.
>
>
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
>> You know, Bower, Rokinon, Vivitar etc???
>>
>
>
>

Am 30.09.2011 20:06, schrieb David:
> If you have a high bright dark contrast sharply defined in any corner
> you don't see any CA?

Well, no. I see the usual purple fringing but no CA. How to distinguish
see http://wiki.panotools.org/CA#How_to_distinguish

--
Erik Krause
Offenburger Str. 33
79108 Freiburg

Am 30.09.2011 22:01, schrieb Erik Krause:
> Well, no.

Ooops, sorry. I looked at the TIFs and for some reason DPP didn't copy
the Makernotes lens type over so I didn't recognize they where already
corrected and the RAWs where stored away on an external drive. In fact
the Samyang 8mm images show a clear purple-green fringing which can be
corrected well with DPP.

I used the EF 50/1.4 as fake lens, left the main slider at 100 and
pulled both R and B sliders to the very right.

--
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de

A little more info on the subject:
The trouble with the latest versions of DPP with regard to 'fixing' the EXIF
from non-Canon lenses is that besides the regular FocalLength field it now ALSO
checks the recorded ShortFocal and LongFocal fields.

To change these you could use a recent version of ExifToolGUI which has a new
option to "modify ShortFocal & LongFocal according to LensType" in the
'MakersNotes Canon' menu. Select that option.

Note that you can also change the reported FocalLength in the Quick-menu. This
means that you can modify your EXIF to *any* lens type you want, no matter what
the original was. Just make sure you change the Quick-menu FocalLength to a
value that is appropriate for the lens type you selected in the MakersNotes
menu.

I always use the EF14mm f/2.8L type for my SIGMA 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye RAW images,
as the two are not too dissimilar. Sadly Canon's own 15mm Fisheye is not in the
list.

If you'd like more info about ExifTool and ExifToolGUI you should have a look
here:
<http://u88.n24.queensu.ca/exiftool/forum/index.php#c1>

The latest version of ExifTool can be found here:
<http://owl.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/>

The latest version of ExifToolGUI can be found here:
<http://u88.n24.queensu.ca/~bogdan/exiftoolgui421.zip>

Success!

Erik Leeman

<http://www.erikleeman.com>  <http://www.flickr.com/photos/erik-nl/>

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Erik Krause wrote:
>
> Am 30.09.2011 08:32, schrieb David:
> > Has anybody had any luck faking out the latest DPP (ver 3.10+)
> > lens corrections for non-Canon lenses?
> >
> > Trying to get CA for a Samyang 8mm.
>
> Yes. You need exiftool (best with exiftoolGUI) latest version.
> There you can modify the Canon Makernotes (from Modify menu). I
> guess your camera records 50mm as focal length for an adapted lens.
> Hence you must choose a lens with this focal inside the range or
> change focal length to your need.
>
> I use the EF 24-70 f/2.8 for the Zenitar fisheye. You must find out
> for yourself what works best for the Samyang, since Canon does a
> lens specific CA pre-correction where you can fine tune the result
> only.
>
> Give feedback once you are done...
> --
> Erik Krause
> http://www.erik-krause.de