Exactly! The DNG file is from the RAW file but has DJI hand in it fixing the curve and other issues that helps lens to sensor performance. Not all guys like what they are doing. But tbo it saves us a little time and I am fine with giving away a few pixels to help the image quickly! This stuff will get better as time and tech move along too!not true - the software is handling the files just fine - that's what the raw files look like
Opening the files in Adobe Camera Raw uses an embedded profile (pre-appled to all jpegs as well) which has been discussed at length on here before
Still photo curved horizon, video straight..
- Thread starter Håkan22
- Start date
Opened fine in Windows10 default viewer...
No, wait, that's Chrome displaying it. Must be Dropbox applying the lens filter.
No, wait, that's Chrome displaying it. Must be Dropbox applying the lens filter.
Last edited:
Windows 10 viewer doesn't display the raw file, it shows the jpeg preview which of course has already had the 'fix' applied - check the file size. windows sees the raws as 38mb 960 x 480 pixels
....and I am one of those guys that "doesn't like what they are doing" 25% of pixels is a LOT to chuck away and it has nothing to do with "tech" that will improve over time as mentioned, but everything to with DJI using cheap arse lens that was not designed to cover a 1 inch sensor. If they had used a suitable lens, there would be no need to embed a lens correction profile to hide crappy corners and curvilinear distortion and we could all enjoy a true 20mp image and not a cropped "interpolated" 15mp one.
I had no problem opening any of the files you uploaded using just my browser. No horizon curvature at all. Sounds like a driver issue to me. I'm using Chrome on Windows 10 version 1709 build 16296
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,355
- Reaction score
- 9,298
Yet, for all the complaining, the P4 pro is still the best you can get in a flying camera in this price range and a huge improvement beyond anything else available for a similar price.
Perhaps the new Yuneec E90 camera that is just coming out might make you happier?
I haven't seen reviews yet .... but the H520 drone + camera will cost 2x what a P4 pro does.
Neither have I as google drive is correcting it. However in the end it appears most of the photo editors have a built in preset that fixes Ph4Pro DNG's but mine didn't (yet). I got a preset to Photoeditor which is fixing the issue.
Btw thanks all for your engagement!
It's not a question of price point for many of us, it's about getting the camera that they advertised. $50 more on top of a $3000 drone and most wouldn't bat an eye.... especially if it meant that we got the "even better" performing camera that we rightfully expected.
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,355
- Reaction score
- 9,298
I hope you find what you're looking for somewhere.
You'll never be happy with the P4 pro.
BTW ... perhaps you could share some of the images that might have been great if only the camera hadn't ruined it for you so we can see what you're talking about and get an idea of whether the complaint is justified or not?
Look... I get it. You're happy with it. Your level of acceptance in this case happens to be lower than mine. More power to you.
But that doesn't mean that my level of dissatisfaction is unjustified. The advertised specs are misleading, end of story, cant be denied. It has a 20mp sensor, does it use all of it? NO .... Does it produce real 20mp images ? No ....Does it leave black corners in "full RAW" images? Yes .....Do these things effect me and my image making? Yes
I couldn't give two f**ks with how it compares to others on the market. What I care about is that I didn't receive the camera that was advertised and it doesn't produce the result that I rightfully expected based on the advertised specifications. Again, if that is no worry to you, fine. But don't discount the position of others because of your own personal position.
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,355
- Reaction score
- 9,298
That's all very well but I see complaints all the time from a variety of people about all kinds of things.
Some are justified and some are not.
I can't tell whether you are really suffering with substandard images or just one of those people that will complain incessantly about insignificant trivia.
I have many still images taken in RAW. None, with my P3P or P4P have that kind of curved horizon. If you use Lightroom, you can indicate which camera you are using and Lightroom will correct the distortion. See: www.schundlerphoto.com under the Aerial Photography tab or the video tab.
it doesn't affect the drones you are flying - if you read through the many threads on the subject it only applies to the 4 Pro, Pro+ and Advanced.
The 'issue' isn't applying a profile, it's the already embedded one that you can't easily remove if you rely on Adobe products
Not sure what you are talking about. I use Adobe Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop ... via a subscription so that they are always updated. I never see a curve horizon when using either a P3P or a P4P. A part of the reason earlier models showed a curved horizon was they had a much wider angle lens which introduced some distortion.
what I'm talking about is that Adobe products (up to date or not) will read the embedded profile which (quite crudely) corrects the curbvature and vignetting by cropping the image down to about 14mp and then resampling/scaling it back up to 20mp
In Adobe Camera Raw click on the lens tab and look at the bottom of the page
Thanks, I’ll check that out. I use Lightroom which, I believe has Adobe Camera Raw built in. I never felt the need to adjust the horizon curve ... maybe, from what you noted, the adjustment is done upon importing the image into LIghtroom. At this sight, www.schundlerphoto.com, you’ll see some of my Phantom images under the Gallery Tab under the Aerial Photography drop menu selection.
Yes Lightroom is automatically applying the correction by using the embedded profile (and you can't bypass it in LR). The lens itself is in fact not that much different than earlier models, as it still have heaps of curvilinear distortion sadly.
