| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
joker
Joined: 19 Jan 2010
Posts: 87
Location: Italy
|
 Posted: 23rd Jan 2010, Sat, 10:21 Post subject: dcraw |
 |
|
hi all,
i was trying to compile RT in Microsoft Visual Studio and I'm facing a lot of problems. (I succeeded with Eclipse CMake and MinGW)
Well, I don't know if this will ever come to an end but I write some consideration:
I noticed dcraw.c by Dave Coffin is integrated in RT not directly, but through a modified .cc versio with some modifications; this imply that is not simple to upgrade to a newer version of dcraw.c that support newer cameras.
dcraw.cc can not be compiled with Microsoft C++ compiler (error C1061: too many "else if"),
but dcraw.c is compiled OK with C compiler.
My suggestion is to crete a DLL that include dcraw.c "as is", and exports the functions or functionality to RT: this way would be simpler also to support users asking for recent cameras simply distributing the dll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Keith
Joined: 02 Feb 2008
Posts: 265
Location: Blyth, NE England
|
| Posted: 23rd Jan 2010, Sat, 12:20 Post subject: |
|
|
Absolutely agree Joker - "modular" DCRAW update ability is something I've proposed for a long time.
_________________
Keith Reeder
Capture The Moment
Canon cameras and lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paul.matthijsse
Joined: 07 Oct 2008
Posts: 667
Location: Dieulefit, France
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Joined: 02 Feb 2008
Posts: 265
Location: Blyth, NE England
|
| Posted: 23rd Jan 2010, Sat, 15:36 Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Paul,
yeah, I read that post, but it still relies on there being a new RT release which includes the latest DCRAW.
Fine at the moment, when there's likely to be a lot of unstable releases popping out, but down the line when we're stable, it'd be nice to simply be able to drop new DCRAW dll into the RT folder whenever DCRAW is updated.
It'd keep RT version numbering sensible too.
_________________
Keith Reeder
Capture The Moment
Canon cameras and lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DrSlony
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 934
Location: London, Rainy Kingdom
|
| Posted: 23rd Jan 2010, Sat, 20:54 Post subject: |
|
|
| Keith there's no problem releasing a stable release with an updated dcraw even if we're into the future with a newer unstable version. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Joined: 02 Feb 2008
Posts: 265
Location: Blyth, NE England
|
| Posted: 24th Jan 2010, Sun, 11:14 Post subject: |
|
|
Oh, I'm not saying there'd be a "problem" Dr, I just like the idea of a user-updatable DCRAW.
_________________
Keith Reeder
Capture The Moment
Canon cameras and lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joker
Joined: 19 Jan 2010
Posts: 87
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: 24th Jan 2010, Sun, 12:56 Post subject: |
|
|
I was considering first, dcraw.c modifications:
IMHO is not very "elegant" to modify an external (not mantained by RT group) file every time it changes. This is not a simple mod to apply for beginners approaching RT.
Maybe this is the only viable solution?
And also dcraw.cc will not compile under VS (OK,there are a lot of other problems  ... is there anybody trying this? ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DrSlony
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 934
Location: London, Rainy Kingdom
|
| Posted: 24th Jan 2010, Sun, 19:17 Post subject: |
|
|
Keith and I'm not saying that yours is a bad idea  Is a dcraw.dll easily possible?
| http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin/dcraw/ wrote: | Why don't you implement dcraw as a library?
I have decided that dcraw shall be a command-line program written in C, and that any further abstraction layers must be added around this core, not inside it.
Library code is ugly because it cannot use global variables. Libraries are more difficult to modify, build, install, and test than standalone programs, and so are inappropriate for file formats that change every day. |
Also I believe I read that our glorious leader Gabor modifies dcraw in some way, it would need His confirmation :] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Joined: 02 Feb 2008
Posts: 265
Location: Blyth, NE England
|
| Posted: 25th Jan 2010, Mon, 01:29 Post subject: |
|
|
Don't know if it's easy, hard or impossible, Dr. S - I'm speaking entirely as an end user, I'm afraid.
I guess that with RT now being OS - and this hopefully meaning regular versions to keep up with DCRAW - the modular DCRAW idea might be redundant.
I first suggested it when Gabor was still the only coder, and I thought that users being able to plug in a new DCRAW whenever one was released would lessen the pressure of work on him.
_________________
Keith Reeder
Capture The Moment
Canon cameras and lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keenonkites
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 417
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: 25th Jan 2010, Mon, 08:23 Post subject: |
|
|
| DrSlony wrote: | | Also I believe I read that our glorious leader Gabor modifies dcraw in some way, it would need His confirmation :] |
That is true also in my opinion....
Patrik |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eduperez
Joined: 23 Jan 2008
Posts: 82
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benjamin_L
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 79
|
| Posted: 25th Jan 2010, Mon, 09:56 Post subject: |
|
|
| this would only outsource the problem of dcraw integration, don't know if it would make sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eduperez
Joined: 23 Jan 2008
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: 25th Jan 2010, Mon, 10:19 Post subject: |
|
|
| Benjamin_L wrote: | | this would only outsource the problem of dcraw integration, don't know if it would make sense. |
With a dynamically linked library, RT will use whatever LibRaw version it finds on the system; so RT will not need to be recompiled / redistributed each time dcraw / libraw is updated. IMHO, it makes much more sense to update only the software directly affected.
_________________
photoblog.edu-perez.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blk
Joined: 10 Jan 2010
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: 25th Jan 2010, Mon, 20:41 Post subject: |
|
|
including it as shared lib is certainly possible but probably easier with an alternative to dcraw. Anyway i don't see (the majority of) windows-folks compiling a new version of dcraw themselves (esp. a plugable version of it) and since in that case it'd need to be published to the website, it's just as quick to do a complete rebuild of RT and release that.. (yes i do admit it would be a nice-to-have.. but by no means a priority)
concerning alternatives: libopenraw, libraw. libkdcraw which is kde's wrapper around dcraw is probably too KDE-dependant
i have no clue on how these compare feature/speed wise to dcraw
_________________
Everyday is a gift, that's why it's called the present. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dalex_257
Joined: 09 Mar 2010
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: 9th Mar 2010, Tue, 15:20 Post subject: |
|
|
| blk wrote: |
concerning alternatives: libopenraw, libraw. libkdcraw which is kde's wrapper around dcraw is probably too KDE-dependant
i have no clue on how these compare feature/speed wise to dcraw |
Not at all - libopenraw is not even close to dcraw and LibRaw has nothing to do with KDE.
Actually, eduperez was right, LibRaw makes a lot of sense unless you want to spend (waste really) time merging all dcraw updates into RT code. LibRaw is written specifically for developers to give access to the raw files, it only contains parts of dcraw that is relevant to file parsing but none of the demosaicing stuff (only as examples). It is actually done for those who develop raw processing tools or raw analyzing tools and is written and maintained by a raw developers themselves (at least Iliah as one of the creators of the RawMagick). It is updated with the same frequency as dcraw yet provides a consistent interface to raw files so each update would require a simple recompile against a new version. Speedwise and featurewise it is the same as dcraw (without the demosaicing of course but RT does not use that part of dcraw). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
