1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Olympus Viewer 2 1.11

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by mauve, Mar 6, 2011.

  1. mauve

    mauve Mu-43 Top Veteran

    892
    Mar 9, 2010
    Paris, France
    Well, not being too sure of the improvements of OV2 over the initial release and especially the backport of some features from Oly's latest cameras to us users of previous models, I finally took some time to make a test run.

    I must say first thing that OV2 isn't my primary software, and is absolutely unlikely to take that spot, simply because it's a Windows / Mac OS X software and my main operating system is Linux since 1998. I dislike windows, don't know how it works, and mostly don't care anymore. And Macs are not even on my radar : got one, poor hardware, quirky software, just not the windows quirks but that doesn't make it any better. And don't hope to sway me :biggrin:

    Good news : Linux's Windows 'emulator' (wine) can run OV2 1.11 as well (or as bad, depending whether you're of the optimistic or pessimistic kind) as it ran OV2 1.0. So far, so good, it means all RAW options work, for those moments I really need the precise colorimetry of the camera instead of my quick and dirty home-made ICC. Good news too, all art filters from the e-pl1 / e-p2 are available even for my e-p1 RAWs. So it is possible to 'develop' ORF files with maker's software on Linux.

    Bad news : as reported by some, the new art filters of the E-5 / E-pl2 have not been backported to previous cameras.

    Worse news : I didn't tested it first hand, but I read that not all the new art filters have made their way in OV2, even for e-pl2 owners (no mark II variations of original filters, no art frame).

    Not a comprehensive test, but that wraps about what to expect from current OV2 1.11, i.e, not much. It's been reported too, though, the improved v. 1.11 is marginally more stable and doesn't crash as often.

    Cheers,
     
  2. mauve

    mauve Mu-43 Top Veteran

    892
    Mar 9, 2010
    Paris, France
    Follow up : I spent the better part of the afternoon 'pushing the envelope' of OV2.

    In a pinch, it's a lousy piece of software ; the advantage of emulation while evaluating a program is to display programming bugs that go unnoticed on a native system, because speed is different for some parts. I had OV2 die on me some times, especially while drawing / calculating User Interface related elements. My gut feeling is there's an awful race condition occurring while OV2 tries to build the small preview images.

    On the other hand, credit where credit's due, the parts related to RAW processing seems to be of very high quality, and it indeeds calculate effects so smoothly on my platform I suspect some handmade sse assembly code optimization. To sum up : real programmers made the difficult parts, and an army of monkeys coded the UI and poorly glued all the pieces together.

    As I felt game for some more, I tried to understand how OV2 decides to show model-specific art filters. So I toyed a lot with exif data, downloaded a couple of ORF samples from an e-pl2, and discovered all the detection is based on the MakerNotes exif field. You can easily swap the MakerNotes field from an e-pl2 raw into another, older file, with exiftool (CLI command). OV2 then happily displays the art filter choice for the e-pl2 camera, even if all other exif data scream the file came from an e-p1.

    But it's not interesting. In OV2, e-p1 / e-p2 / e-pl1 have access to 8 filters, while the e-pl2 is limited to 6 (especially missing the cross process filter), and to add insult to injury, the famous 'Dramatic Mode' filter does crash OV2 if the file doesn't come from a true e-pl2 (while other filters work happily - I won't disassemble the program to understand why, I'm not young enough anymore for such a pointless quest).

    Well, there it is. I'll keep OV2 for those diorama and cross process filters I like to use sometimes, and try to script my own 'dramatic tone' effect - a sandwich of 2 layers of the same image, both contrasted b&w and slightly desaturated color + some corner vignetting is close enough for me.

    Cheers,

    PS : While wandering in the exif fields, I've learned a couple of interesting things.

    - The good part : while the plain text of the 20/f:1.7 says 'PANASONIC', the numeric binary manufacturer's code belongs to... Leica. This would explain a lot of things about the exceptional behavior of the lens.

    - The sad part (from an e-p1 ORF) :

    Circle Of Confusion : 0.015 mm
    Depth Of Field : 1.50 m (1.29 - 2.80)
    Field Of View : 47.9 deg (1.57 m)
    Focal Length : 20.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 40.1 mm)
    Hyperfocal Distance : 4.76 m
    Focus Distance : 1.77 m

    So the camera knew from day 1 all the relevant data necessary to set up itself the lens at hyperfocal, display the DOF on a scale, or allow any other function suitable to instant street shooting. SO WHY ON EARTH DIDN'T OLYMPUS IMPLEMENTED SUCH A FUNCTION IN A DEDICATED SCREEN / MENU ? This is beyond me !
     
  3. Alanroseman

    Alanroseman Super Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 21, 2010
    New England
    Good stuff Mauve.

    Very interesting, the aside regarding the 20mm / Leica was pretty darn good too!

    ps. That bit of code would make for an interesting post if you could manage / capture it..
     
  4. API75

    API75 Mu-43 Rookie

    19
    Feb 11, 2010
    > You can easily swap the MakerNotes field from an e-pl2 raw into another,
    > older file, with exiftool (CLI command)

    Please could you share the right exiftool command (I did not manage to do it, I'm not really a good hacker...)?

    > So the camera knew from day 1 all the relevant data necessary to set up
    > itself the lens at hyperfocal, display the DOF on a scale

    INCREDIBLE WE SHOULD WRITE A PETITION TO OLYMPUS!!!
    Just imagine with a wideangle lens: you set hyperfocal and that's it...
    Or you could also set 10cm of DOF to have a proper portrait without focusing one eye and de-focusing the other one, or many other things!
    I guess we need an SDK and an app store.
     
  5. mauve

    mauve Mu-43 Top Veteran

    892
    Mar 9, 2010
    Paris, France
    Sure. First you need to extract MakerNotes from an ORF to a temporary file with :
    Code:
    exiftool -b -MakerNotes file_1.ORF > file_1.dat
    And then you import the field back into a 2nd image like this :
    Code:
    exiftool -b '-MakerNotes<=file_1.dat' file_2.ORF
    The quotes around -MakerNotes<=file_1.dat in the 2nd command prevent the shell to interpret the '<' as a redirection. They may be different on your system if you're not using bash as a CLI. Happy hacking :biggrin:

    (it goes without saying you shouldn't work on original files but on copies, and preferably in a dedicated directory to avoid smashing to pieces original pictures).

    My thinking exactly.

    Cheers,
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. mauve

    mauve Mu-43 Top Veteran

    892
    Mar 9, 2010
    Paris, France
    There you are :

    plain text (from 'exiftool _3043612.ORF') :
    Lens Type : Leica Unknown Model (2 5) Unknown Release (16)
    Lens Serial Number : 00XXnnnnnnn
    Lens Firmware Version : 1.100
    Max Aperture At Min Focal : 1.7
    Max Aperture At Max Focal : 1.7
    Min Focal Length : 20
    Max Focal Length : 20

    numeric (exiftool -b -LensType _3043612.ORF) :
    2 0 5 16 0 16

    okay, after this I upgraded to latest exiftool version (8.5), and now I get :
    Lens Type : Lumix G 20mm F1.7 Asph.

    so obviously, this is now treated as a special case... no more Leica reference, still, it's intriguing even if MakerNotes field values have no obligation to follow a standard or any registration to apply for.

    Cheers,
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Alanroseman

    Alanroseman Super Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 21, 2010
    New England
    Hi Mauve,

    Thanks. Nice bit of detecting there.

    So, it looks like they're on to you... no more easter eggs named Leica.

    Good that the cat is out of the bag though, I hope a few folks take notice as I'm agreement with you on that association being at least in part responsible for the great images produced by the 20....

    Thanks again. Alan
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. mauve

    mauve Mu-43 Top Veteran

    892
    Mar 9, 2010
    Paris, France
    Been digging that further in exiftool online documentation.

    So, from what is known at the moment, 1st digit is maker number : 0 is olympus, 1 is Sigma, and 2 is either Leica and/or Panasonic, and 3 is Leica alone.

    The 2 other relevant numbers are normally lens type in third position and subtype at the end of data (the distinction between type and subtype is actually quite loose, it's more a question of combining both), but when maker # is 2, if subtype is 0 or 1, brand is Leica, if 16, brand is Panasonic.

    So 2 0 5 16 0 16 reads 'Pana or Leica type 5 lens branded by Panasonic'

    List of all codes as understood by an olympus e-pX :

    '0 0 0' = None
    '0 1 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm F2.0 Macro
    '0 1 1' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 40-150mm F3.5-4.5
    '0 1 16' = Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6
    '0 2 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 150mm F2.0
    '0 2 16' = Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F2.8 Pancake
    '0 3 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F2.8
    '0 3 16' = Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm F4.0-5.6
    '0 4 16' = Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6
    '0 5 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm F2.8-3.5
    '0 5 1' = Olympus Zuiko Digital Pro ED 90-250mm F2.8
    '0 5 16' = Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6
    '0 6 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm F2.8-3.5
    '0 6 1' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 8mm F3.5 Fisheye
    '0 7 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm F2.8-3.5
    '0 7 1' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 18-180mm F3.5-6.3
    '0 8 1' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 70-300mm F4.0-5.6
    '0 9 16' = Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II
    '0 21 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 7-14mm F4.0
    '0 23 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital Pro ED 35-100mm F2.0
    '0 24 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-45mm F3.5-5.6
    '0 32 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 35mm F3.5 Macro
    '0 34 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 17.5-45mm F3.5-5.6
    '0 35 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6
    '0 36 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4.0-5.6
    '0 48 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm F2.8-3.5 SWD
    '0 49 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 SWD
    '0 50 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-35mm F2.0 SWD
    '0 51 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 25mm F2.8
    '0 52 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6
    '0 53 0' = Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm F2.8-3.5 II
    '1 1 0' = Sigma 18-50mm F3.5-5.6
    '1 2 0' = Sigma 55-200mm F4.0-5.6 DC
    '1 3 0' = Sigma 18-125mm F3.5-5.6 DC
    '1 4 0' = Sigma 18-125mm F3.5-5.6
    '1 5 0' = Sigma 30mm F1.4
    '1 6 0' = Sigma 50-500mm F4.0-6.3 EX DG APO HSM RF
    '1 7 0' = Sigma 105mm F2.8 DG
    '1 8 0' = Sigma 150mm F2.8 DG HSM
    '1 16 0' = Sigma 24mm F1.8 EX DG Aspherical Macro
    '1 17 0' = Sigma 135-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG ASP APO RF
    '1 18 0' = Sigma 300-800mm F5.6 EX DG APO
    '1 20 0' = Sigma 50-500mm F4.0-6.3 EX DG APO HSM RF
    '1 21 0' = Sigma 10-20mm F4.0-5.6 EX DC HSM
    '1 22 0' = Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II
    '1 23 0' = Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM
    '2 1 0' = Leica D Vario Elmarit 14-50mm F2.8-3.5 Asph.
    '2 1 16' = Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 Asph. Mega OIS
    '2 2 0' = Leica D Summilux 25mm F1.4 Asph.
    '2 2 16' = Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 Mega OIS
    '2 3 1' = Leica D Vario Elmar 14-50mm F3.8-5.6 Asph.
    '2 3 16' = Lumix G Vario HD 14-140mm F4-5.8 Asph. Mega OIS
    '2 4 0' = Leica D Vario Elmar 14-150mm F3.5-5.6
    '2 4 16' = Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 Asph.
    '2 5 16' = Lumix G 20mm F1.7 Asph.
    '2 8 16' = Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5
    '3 1 0' = Leica D Vario Elmarit 14-50mm F2.8-3.5 Asph.
    '3 2 0' = Leica D Summilux 25mm F1.4 Asph.
     
  9. nursenicole

    nursenicole Mu-43 Regular

    76
    Feb 24, 2011
    boston
    Wow... a lot of this thread is WAY beyond me -- however -- i downloaded OV2 about a week ago just to check it out and see if it had any advantage over PSE, which i've been using for ages, or OM which i also downloaded on a whim just to try after I got this camera...

    I find both of the Olympus programs really user-unfriendly and I had OV2 hang and crash on me more than once. The draw for me was the ability to edit RAW images, but the program itself just doesn't do it for me.

    Just thought I'd add my $0.02 to the conversation :wink:
     
    • Like Like x 1