Jump to content

Grid Dots on RAW image

BulletProof
 Share

Recommended Posts

BulletProof Rookie

BulletProof

Posted
Posted

This is my first digital camera.  I used to shoot film many years ago, and have had a few digital pocket cameras, but I recently bought an X-e1 to try and get into photography again. So far the process that is causing issues is:

1. Take Photo in JpegF/RAW

2. Use Adobe DNG converter to convert RAF files to DNG (so my version of Photoshop can open them)

3. Open in Photoshop and zoom in... (attached image is a clip zoomed in at 300%)

Please note: These grid/squares/dots are not visible in the jpeg image taken directly from the camera into Photoshop... so this issue may have nothing to do with the X-e1 at all... or...

Thank you for any help you can provide!

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites
BulletProof Rookie

BulletProof

Posted
  • Author
Posted

As to upgrading... I am currently trying to exist in this sweet spot where I can continue to run my CS5.5 Adobe Products.  Upgrading DNG will require updating my OS which will mean I can no longer run CS.  And I am not now, not ever, going to pay Adobe monthly to use their software... I will tear my computer out of the wall, pour lighter fluid on it and ignite it before I do that.  So my OS stays where it is for now - and therefore upgrading DNG is not on the radar.  But thank you for the suggestion that that is the source of the problem!

Link to post
Share on other sites
jerryy Veteran

jerryy

Posted
Posted

If you are using a Mac, Affinity’s Develop module will open the .RAF files using your choice of either Apple’s raw engine or Affinity’s raw engine, which you can then export as a .TIFF or or as a .PSD file that Photoshop should open. I do not know how many raw engine choices the Windows Affinity version has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • BobJ
      X-T5 Cleaning Mistake

      By BobJ · Posted

      Because the sensor assembly is moved electrmagnetically. When there is no power it is essentially free moving.
    • jerryy
      Astro-photography (open thread)

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahoy ye hearties! Hoist ye yon Jolly Roger and Cascade away. NGC 1502 The Jolly Roger Cluster:

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

      This is the equivalent of 43 minutes, 40 seconds of exposure. NGC 1502 is a neat little cluster located in the Camelopardalis Constellation. This region of space was thought to be fairly empty by early astronomers, but as you can see, there is a lot there. Kemble's Cascade (a.k.a. Kemble 1) is named for Father Lucian Kemble, a Canadian Franciscan friar who wrote about it to Walter Scott Houston, an author for the Sky And Telescope magazine. Houston named the asterism for Fr. Kemble and the name "stuck". NGC 1501 is the Oyster Nebula. A longer focal length telescope is needed to bring this one into good viewing range, but it is well worth the effort. NGC 1502: https://skyandtelescope.org/online-gallery/ngc-1502/ Camelopardalis Constellation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camelopardalis Kemble's Cascade (and NGC 1501: The Oyster Nebula): https://www.constellation-guide.com/kembles-cascade/ Arrrrrr Matey.
    • Greybeard
      Only comments are baited ads

      By Greybeard · Posted

    • BIGOAK
      55 or 80?

      By BIGOAK · Posted

      Looking for input; there are some decent deals and might want to take advantage to expand my lenses for my 100s already own: 110/2 32-64 35-70 100-200 + TC   Shooting mostly family shots, bringing my kit to capture family outings indoors and out. Tracking the 63/43 effective FLs on the two, but has anybody used both? Would the 55 (covered by two zooms right now) be redundant? Would the 80 be too similar in character to my 110 for portraiture?
    • Fotomatt
      Only comments are baited ads

      By Fotomatt · Posted

      See what I mean? Two instantaneous ads. Worthless.   
×
×
  • Create New...