Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Barrel Distortion


strawman e2
11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
10 Nov 2012 9:25AM
I would swear that in my camera it applies corrections to the RAW image, white balance, distortion etc, but the RAW image is a RAW image, so you do not want to process it in an auto way. Having said that DPP looks to have a correction ability built in so it can auto correct the RAW. I will check that later (I seldom use JPEG) but it is very common for the cameras to perform in-camera correction for distortion and CA in camera for JPEG.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

SlowSong e2
6 4.8k 29 England
10 Nov 2012 9:37AM
I wouldn't have thought there would be any in-camera corrections to a RAW image with regard to distortion.
The jpgs are "corrected" in other ways to a certain extent but the actual "shape" of the image wouldn't be corrected. Unless there is some very clever lens correction mode in-camera, which would be redundant if the camera was set up to auto-correct this anyway at the outset. So DMing is the only way to correct it.

This distortion happens on DSLRs too obviously and can be corrected easily, I was only surprised at the amount of distortion using the compacts. I never noticed anything like this when using film. Grin
Jestertheclown
6 6.6k 242 England
10 Nov 2012 1:04PM
I'll stand to be corrected but I've always been under the impression that RAW files were just that.
They're what the cameras 'sees' through whatever lens is put in front of it and they're served up without any correction/modification at all.
SlowSong e2
6 4.8k 29 England
10 Nov 2012 3:14PM

Quote:I'll stand to be corrected but I've always been under the impression that RAW files were just that.
They're what the cameras 'sees' through whatever lens is put in front of it and they're served up without any correction/modification at all.

Exactly. So I can't understand what strawman means.
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
10 Nov 2012 5:24PM
I don't think RAW files are quite as 'raw' as one might imagine. Wink

For example, noise reduction can be applied by the camera.
SlowSong e2
6 4.8k 29 England
10 Nov 2012 5:52PM
The optimum word here is "can" (i.e. deliberately set the camera up to do so). I don't think you can correct distortion in-camera, jpg or raw.
strawman e2
11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
10 Nov 2012 11:10PM
Hi sorry I have typed incorrectly.

I meant to say.


Quote:I would swear that in my camera it applies corrections to the JPEG image, white balance, distortion etc,
Sorry was typing and thinking of something else at the same time. :-(

Some pictures of a photo to make distortion look bad. First straight C1 RAW process and it looks bad
c1-raw.jpg


Next the camera produced JPEG it is a lot better
camera-jpeg.jpg


And DPP as it comes about same as JPEG
dpp-raw1.jpg


Finally DPP with lens correction, best of the lot
dpp-corr1.jpg



When I saw this in the past I just assumed that the in-camera JPEG has some distortion correction applied, and DPP has a default level of correction that can be improved upon. Any other views?
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
11 Nov 2012 1:40AM

Quote:For example, noise reduction can be applied by the camera


Yes, to Jpegs, settings can sometimes be set to raw images, but the changes are not permanent and can be later changed in raw software.

I can remember reading a review about the Olympus 12mm, a lot depended on what computer the reviewer was using.

His windows PC and software corrected the barrel distortion, his Apple PC and software did not.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.