Author Topic: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots. (Read 75385 times)

escho · « **Reply #50 on:** January 25, 2014, 05:08:41 PM »

My new version: https://bitbucket.org/escho/escho-magiclantern/commits/73cdb580bb144c461abfb481da0b57f51822bd00

The struct isn´t implemented yet, must first look, how to work with such structs. And the german comments are only for my understanding.

Here some testpics, with and without coldpix-removing

without_badpix von seescho auf Flickr

with_badpix von seescho auf Flickr

Edgar

a1ex · « **Reply #51 on:** January 25, 2014, 05:22:51 PM »

Nice!

Structure is more of a style thing, don't worry too much about this.

About the bad pixel list, you don't know in advance how many bad pixels you have. So, you need to check if you still have space in the array before inserting a new item (otherwise you get a buffer overflow - of course, only when you will have more than 1000 pixels). You can use the COUNT() macro for this.

Also, it's clearer to start the counter from 0, not from -1 (so it always represents the number of items you have in the array, not N-1).

escho · « **Reply #52 on:** January 25, 2014, 05:46:33 PM »

Quote from: a1ex on January 25, 2014, 05:22:51 PM

You can use the COUNT() macro for this.

Where do I find this makro for to have a look into it?

Edgar

a1ex · « **Reply #53 on:** January 25, 2014, 05:58:40 PM »

It's used in many places in ML source.

escho · « **Reply #54 on:** January 25, 2014, 08:46:06 PM »

Next version: https://bitbucket.org/escho/escho-magiclantern/commits/d8ee79b52f15834d1e94d2aca14a9f2dcf1c7d5c
working with struct (nice thing)
malloc isn´t needed anymore

And now, I´m looking, how to avoid this buffer overflow

Edgar

escho · « **Reply #55 on:** January 25, 2014, 10:16:08 PM »

And the next one: https://bitbucket.org/escho/escho-magiclantern/commits/6411b87ba71a09c073fa6e756e8bfc3ff9e3a58a
fix buffer overflow

What so you mean about this solution?

A speed test gives the same results for with and without badpixel-removing. Doing this speedtest, I see some thing. The more frames are decoded, the more slow the decoding works (with the original raw2dng ). Here some times:

Code: [Select]

Start decoding: 0s
1000 frames:     3s
2000 frames:     6s
3000 frames:    10s
4000 frames:    19s
5000 frames:    26s
6000 frames:    37s

Why?

Edgar

Luiz Roberto dos Santos · « **Reply #56 on:** January 26, 2014, 10:51:02 AM »

Good job escho. I apologize to the community, to have walked away, but did not really have the ability to solve this problem... I need to learn more about code yet.

But, if I can help in something, such as testing, I'm here.

iaremrsir · « **Reply #57 on:** January 27, 2014, 06:39:01 AM »

This seems to be moving along well! How can I help?

a1ex · « **Reply #58 on:** January 27, 2014, 08:15:21 AM »

escho has an exe file in the downloads section; test it and report the results

escho · « **Reply #59 on:** January 27, 2014, 06:18:39 PM »

For to be exact, it´s a linux "exe-file". I cannot provide an exe file for windows.
And yes, it would be nice, if you could do some tests and report, what´s going on.

Edgar

a1ex · « **Reply #60 on:** January 27, 2014, 06:30:56 PM »

Sorry, didn't notice.

Here's a binary compiled directly from escho's source. Run some tests, and if all is fine I'll update the main raw2dng with this one.

raw2dng_escho.exe

hjfilmspeed · « **Reply #61 on:** January 28, 2014, 01:17:05 AM »

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Luiz Roberto dos Santos · « **Reply #62 on:** January 28, 2014, 06:00:17 AM »

Quote from: a1ex on January 27, 2014, 06:30:56 PM

Sorry, didn't notice.

Here's a binary compiled directly from escho's source. Run some tests, and if all is fine I'll update the main raw2dng with this one.

raw2dng_escho.exe

So, I try it with footage from 600D, and I cant find any difference. I use your compilation vs oficial from g3gg0 topic, and process it with ufraw (ahd). Any idea?

a1ex · « **Reply #63 on:** January 28, 2014, 06:54:05 AM »

I think I've compiled the wrong branch, can you download it again?

iaremrsir · « **Reply #64 on:** January 28, 2014, 07:37:15 AM »

I will do a complete test on Friday. How well does it do with FPN? I know there's a fix for 5D3, but does the same fix work for the 600D?

a1ex · « **Reply #65 on:** January 28, 2014, 07:40:53 AM »

There are no fixes about FPN yet. For this, I might have to record some optical black data. I want to study it on silent pictures first, because they include full optical black data; so if you have a burst of silent pictures that show this problem, upload them here: www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=9564

Luiz Roberto dos Santos · « **Reply #66 on:** January 28, 2014, 08:36:55 AM »

Quote from: a1ex on January 28, 2014, 06:54:05 AM

I think I've compiled the wrong branch, can you download it again?

Work very good now.
Any idea for calculate the line and column of the bad pix? There's some badpix than escho modifications not interpolate... I can indicate it on some file, but I think better indicate the line/column.

a1ex · « **Reply #67 on:** January 28, 2014, 08:39:29 AM »

In gimp, put the mouse cursor on the bad pixel and read the coords from status bar. I believe MS Paint does it too.

Luiz Roberto dos Santos · « **Reply #68 on:** January 28, 2014, 09:35:04 AM »

0k.
On here:

Code: [Select]

X: 47,26
Y: 3,26

And [maybe] here:

Code: [Select]

X: 2,70
Y: 0,37

There's bad pix not removed.

I not test very much, but it's very effective! But, I think this is slow yet... on my garbage HD, this run approx. 89% more slow...

a1ex · « **Reply #69 on:** January 28, 2014, 09:37:54 AM »

My crystal ball is brand new and shiny, there are no bad pixels on it at these coords

Luiz Roberto dos Santos · « **Reply #70 on:** January 28, 2014, 09:42:23 AM »

Are you sure a1ex? I tested at least 4 footage with the 600D and the first coordinate badpix appear...

edit: see the first coord. on this archives https://app.box.com/s/t1voim3ew086ko0aze81

escho · « **Reply #71 on:** January 28, 2014, 08:01:08 PM »

Can you upload a short raw-video, containing these bad pixels, please?

Edgar

Luiz Roberto dos Santos · « **Reply #72 on:** January 28, 2014, 09:48:15 PM »

escho · « **Reply #73 on:** January 28, 2014, 10:31:09 PM »

Thanks for the file.

I downloaded and decoded it with the badpix-fix. All the coldpixels are removed:

000036 von seescho auf Flickr

Opening with gimp shows no badpixels too

Edgar

filo99 · « **Reply #74 on:** January 28, 2014, 11:02:43 PM »

any chance of a mac version?

News:

Author Topic: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots. (Read 75385 times)