SPP Mac 3.2 vs SPP PC 2.5 | On a Mac!

I got lots of mail lately regarding my strange choice of running PC version of SPP rather then the native SPP 3.2 on my Mac. Well, as you will see in this video there is a good reason for me to do this. Watch this video in better quality.

Hopefully some smart guys at Sigma can fix this in the next edition of the Mac version of SPP, maybe release some open source? :D. 

And Yes, I’m aware that I say “These are SD pictures..” when it’s DP1 images. I do correct myself without really knowing. :P Forgive me. 

About Carl Rytterfalk

Welcome to my blog! I'm Carl Rytterfalk, a swedish photographer who loves everything that is interesting in the world of photography. In 2002 I fell in love with the three layered Foveon sensor and has since then been an addicted user of Sigma cameras. Though I use Canon and Nikon as well. :)
This entry was posted in All. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to SPP Mac 3.2 vs SPP PC 2.5 | On a Mac!

  1. spalbird says:

    I really can’t understand the protective behaviour not only from Sigma. Why don’t Sigma open source all characteristics of the sensor AND the X3F format? This would give 3rd party suppliers a business model, and maybe Sigma the opportunity to save money on development which they obviously don’t have to bring the quality of the convertor where it should be.

    An alternative to open sourcing would be concentrating on performant image processing algorithms necessary for decoding Foveon images from X3F, eventually in hand-optimised assembler coding for PC and Mac, and publish than as a library and an API, so that all 3rd party providers (Adobe with Lightroom, Apple with Aperture…) can deliver their products with high quality and bleeding fast X3F convertors.

    They would not loose any money, instead they could improve their product’s quality significantly.

  2. VitalBodies says:

    Looks like you got SSP going! Did you get a chance to try UFraw also?

  3. VitalBodies says:

    UFRaw: Can it run on your system?
    Here is some deeper info on the matter. Would be fun to hear what you all think of this program…
    http://ufraw.sourceforge.net/Install.html

    Note there a number of mentions about MAC on this page also.

  4. Rudolph Geesink says:

    Did the same trick of PC on a Mac using Parallels. The PC version is somewhat faster indeed but the main difference with the color wheel (and some of the other tools) is that the PC continually opdates the preview while the Mac version only does so when you release the mouse, much less intuitive.
    My workflow with the DP1 (great little camera) is to use the Sigma software only to preview/select and then batch save the X3F raw files as 16-bit TIFF which should preserve all image detail and then import them in Aperture. 16-bit TIFF’s are larger than X3F’s but you can utilize all the power of Aperture to finalize the images.

  5. VitalBodies, I tried to install UFRAw but without luck. Iäm not smart enought to follow the instructions. Maybe if you help me out. I do have xcode installed as well as X11 so it should work. I did download whetever seamed to be needed. :)

    You know where to find me.

  6. Myga says:

    Great thing on a mac. I had to @ my E6300 to 2,8GH to get the same speed in LT (windows)

  7. Chris says:

    Hey Carl,

    I’m trying to do the same thing you’ve done because SPP keeps crashing on my Mac Pro. I got it up and running in VMWare Fusion without a problem, and it is much faster and more stable.

    However, I’m not sure how to save the RAW files as TIFFs in a place where I can access them on my Mac. I’ve tried saving them directly onto my desktop from SPP 2.5, but that doesn’t seem to work. I get an executable file with a .tmp extension – definitely not a TIFF I can open in Lightroom!

    Honestly I am not sure if the DP1 is worth all of this hassle for me. It’s a great camera, sure. But this is kind of ridiculous.

  8. Adrian says:

    Hi,

    I’ve been using a while ufraw on Linux and found that SPP has much better tiff output in therms of image detail compared to ufraw.
    This is very unfortunate since I hate using Windows.

    Have you had the chance to use ufraw menawhile and get an oppinion with regard to this issue?

    These are the two outputs for comparison (I couldn’t upload it to your blog for some reason): http://www.neurouniverse.net/SPPvsUFRAW.zip

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)