Thomas Knoll has free edge recovery utility

[johnastovall]

Thomas Knoll has a free utility which works with DNR to recover all the pixels on the sensor.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/co...er-Edges.shtml

It look's interesting and I'll be trying it this week.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

Thomas Knoll has a free utility which works with DNR to recover all the pixels on the sensor.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/co...er-Edges.shtml

It look's interesting and I'll be trying it this week.

Just downloaded it and ran a quick test. It does get more pixels out of the DNG than are in the RAW. My quick test was Raw 3501x2336 pixel CR2 image. After conversion to DNG and running Knoll's utility it was 3522x2348 but reported it had recovered some 85K pixels. I'm going to have to think about this.

[engstrom]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

My quick test was Raw 3501x2336 pixel CR2 image. After conversion to DNG and running Knoll's utility it was 3522x2348 but reported it had recovered some 85K pixels. I'm going to have to think about this.

3522 * 2348 = 8269656
3501 * 2336 = 8178336

8269656 - 8178336 = 91,320 more pixels

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by engstrom

3522 * 2348 = 8269656
3501 * 2336 = 8178336

8269656 - 8178336 = 91,320 more pixels

Or around 89K more, depending on how you like to count your k

[engstrom]

Originally Posted by GordonMcGregor

Or around 89K more, depending on how you like to count your k

Yeah, I did that too. But the only time I use 1024 for a K is when talking about computer memory and disk space (although disk drive manufacturers rate there drives with 1,000 as a K).

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by engstrom

3522 * 2348 = 8269656
3501 * 2336 = 8178336

8269656 - 8178336 = 91,320 more pixels

Oh, as he bangs his head on the desk and I used to do computational algorithms.

[markfh]

Still waiting to see if it's practical or not.