I have just downloaded the most recent trial version to test it out,
but when I plug in the camera nothing happens, when I try to import
from camera, nothing also happens. I can manually upload the photos to
the harddisc and then open them (format: cr2).

Anybody with an idea on what I can do to rememdy the problem? I am
using windows xp service pack 2.

<aerangis@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1160763880.558588.115040@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I have just downloaded the most recent trial version to test it out,
> but when I plug in the camera nothing happens, when I try to import
> from camera, nothing also happens. I can manually upload the photos 
> to
> the harddisc and then open them (format: cr2).
>
> Anybody with an idea on what I can do to rememdy the problem? I am
> using windows xp service pack 2.
>

The only real remedy at this time is to get PhotoLine 32 v13 or Serif 
PhotoPlus v11. These are just 2 of the many other full-featured 
graphics-editors that properly support all digital camera's 
file-types. These two programs in particular should have no problems, 
and are both an affordable solution (~$80 each). They support all RAW 
camera formats. You won't have to wait another 2 years to see if Corel 
is going to add your camera's RAW file format after you send in a 
request for it, that they may or may not read. They just don't care as 
long as they can get your money while doing as little as possible for 
their customers. That is more than evident. You can ask anyone that 
sent in a request for them to fix the bugs all the way back to PSP 9 
and they never have.

> The only real remedy at this time is to get PhotoLine 32 v13 or Serif 
> PhotoPlus v11.

Wrong.

Photoline cannot read Canon's EOS D20 RAW format directly. Don't know about 
Serif's.

Another remedy? Photoshop.

Sheen Gone 



-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Sheen Gone" <sheengone@wanadoo.es> wrote in message 
news:4533caa5$0$4500$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
>> The only real remedy at this time is to get PhotoLine 32 v13 or 
>> Serif PhotoPlus v11.
>
> Wrong.
>
> Photoline cannot read Canon's EOS D20 RAW format directly. Don't 
> know about Serif's.
>
> Another remedy? Photoshop.
>

A more inexpensive remedy? PhotoLine 32. After you've reported that it 
needs your particular camera's RAW format support being updated. 
Judging from past experience with how rapidly they fix things or add 
improvements (after a simple request to their support address or 
forums), you should have an affordable solution in about a week or so. 
In fact, if you had posted this info on their forums at the same time 
you did here you probably would have had your solution within a few 
days from now.

Even completely new features that they have never considered before 
will be added that fast. As can be shown by one person requesting that 
spell-check be added to their text editor. It was available in their 
next update within a few days after asking. Not only was it added in, 
but they even improved the GNU-based spell-check routine so it would 
spell-check as you type. Not as an option after entering text, as all 
other applications that implemented that spell-checker module have in 
the past.

I have never engaged Serif with any update nor bug-fix requests so I 
can't say how fast they would respond if you find that their software 
doesn't support your camera.

Or ... you can wait another 2 years to see if Corel will fix it in 
their software. But don't get your hopes up.

<aerangis@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1160763880.558588.115040@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I have just downloaded the most recent trial version to test it out,
> but when I plug in the camera nothing happens, when I try to import
> from camera, nothing also happens. I can manually upload the photos to
> the harddisc and then open them (format: cr2).
>
> Anybody with an idea on what I can do to rememdy the problem? I am
> using windows xp service pack 2.
>

I never try and read directly from the camera (I have a 20d too) - I always
pull them onto hard-disc before doing anything with them and make backups
as I worry about corruption on the card. I use a card reader and SilkyPix
(a Japanese raw converter - v3 beta has just come out) to work with
them - PSP is pretty limited with RAW file conversion. You can still get 
hold
of Rawshooter Essentials (a free RAW converter) if you're quick, which is
also pretty good.

Julie 

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 14:03:47 -0500, "Sheen Gone" <sheengone@wanadoo.es> wrote:

>> The only real remedy at this time is to get PhotoLine 32 v13 or Serif 
>> PhotoPlus v11.
>
>Wrong.
>
>Photoline cannot read Canon's EOS D20 RAW format directly. Don't know about 
>Serif's.
>

Below is a list from PhotoLine's website of all the RAW formats it can read.

Canon EOS 20D is on the list. Is this different from a EOS D20? There's a D30 on
the list, wouldn't it have the same format as D20? If Import > Digtal Camera RAW
Data doesn't work, does the Import > RAW Image Data option work? Looks like that
could be programmed with a script and put on a tool-button to do most anything,
even RAW formats not even known. ... Nice, can save right to 16-bit TIFFs too.

Adobe Digital Negative (DNG)
AVT F-145C
AVT F-201C
AVT F-510C
AVT F-810C
Canon PowerShot 600 
Canon PowerShot A5 
Canon PowerShot A5 Zoom 
Canon PowerShot A50 
Canon PowerShot Pro70 
Canon PowerShot Pro90 IS 
Canon PowerShot G1 
Canon PowerShot G2 
Canon PowerShot G3 
Canon PowerShot G5 
Canon PowerShot G6 
Canon PowerShot S30 
Canon PowerShot S40 
Canon PowerShot S45 
Canon PowerShot S50 
Canon PowerShot S60 
Canon PowerShot S70 
Canon PowerShot Pro1 
Canon EOS D30 
Canon EOS D60 
Canon EOS 5D 
Canon EOS 10D 
Canon EOS 20D 
Canon EOS 300D 
Canon EOS 350D 
Canon EOS Digital Rebel 
Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT 
Canon EOS Kiss Digital 
Canon EOS D2000C 
Canon EOS-1D 
Canon EOS-1DS 
Canon EOS-1D Mark II 
Canon EOS-1D Mark II N
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II 
Casio QV-2000UX 
Casio QV-3000EX 
Casio QV-3500EX 
Casio QV-4000 
Casio QV-5700 
Casio QV-R51 
Casio QV-R61 
Casio EX-S100 
Casio EX-Z50 
Casio EX-Z55 
Casio Exlim Pro 505 
Casio Exlim Pro 600 
Casio Exlim Pro 700 
Contax N Digital 
Creative PC-CAM 600 
Epson R-D1 
Foculus 531C
Fuji FinePix E550 
Fuji FinePix F700 
Fuji FinePix F710 
Fuji FinePix F800 
Fuji FinePix F810 
Fuji FinePix S2Pro 
Fuji FinePix S3Pro 
Fuji FinePix S20Pro 
Fuji FinePix S5000 
Fuji FinePix S5100/S5500 
Fuji FinePix S5200 
Fuji FinePix S7000 
Fuji FinePix S9000/S9500 
Imacon Ixpress 16-megapixel 
Imacon Ixpress 22-megapixel 
ISG 2020x1520 
Kodak DC20 (see Oliver Hartman's page) 
Kodak DC25 (see Jun-ichiro Itoh's page) 
Kodak DC40 
Kodak DC50 
Kodak DC120 (also try kdc2tiff) 
Kodak DCS315C 
Kodak DCS330C 
Kodak DCS420 
Kodak DCS460 
Kodak DCS460A 
Kodak DCS520C 
Kodak DCS560C 
Kodak DCS620C 
Kodak DCS620X 
Kodak DCS660C 
Kodak DCS660M 
Kodak DCS720X 
Kodak DCS760C 
Kodak DCS760M 
Kodak EOSDCS1 
Kodak EOSDCS3B 
Kodak NC2000F 
Kodak ProBack 
Kodak PB645C 
Kodak PB645H 
Kodak PB645M 
Kodak DCS Pro 14n 
Kodak DCS Pro 14nx 
Kodak DCS Pro SLR/c 
Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n 
Kodak P850 
Kodak P880 
Kodak KAI-0340 
Konica KD-400Z 
Konica KD-510Z 
Leaf Aptus 17 
Leaf Valeo 11 
Leaf Valeo 22 
Leaf Volare 
Leica Digilux 2 
Logitech Fotoman Pixtura 
Minolta RD175 
Minolta DiMAGE 5 
Minolta DiMAGE 7 
Minolta DiMAGE 7i 
Minolta DiMAGE 7Hi 
Minolta DiMAGE A1 
Minolta DiMAGE A2 
Minolta DiMAGE A200 
Minolta DiMAGE G400 
Minolta DiMAGE G500 
Minolta DiMAGE G600 
Minolta DiMAGE Z2 
Minolta Alpha/Dynax/Maxxum 7 
Minolta Alpha/Dynax/Maxxum 7D 
Nikon D1 
Nikon D1H 
Nikon D1X 
Nikon D100 
Nikon D2H 
Nikon D2Hs 
Nikon D2X 
Nikon D50 
Nikon D70 
Nikon D70s 
Nikon E700 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E800 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E880 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E900 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E950 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E990 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E995 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E2100 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E2500 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E3700 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E4300 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E4500 ("DIAG RAW" hack) 
Nikon E5000 
Nikon E5400 
Nikon E5700 
Nikon E8400 
Nikon E8700 
Nikon E8800 
Olympus C3030Z 
Olympus C5050Z 
Olympus C5060WZ 
Olympus C7070WZ 
Olympus C70Z,C7000Z 
Olympus C740UZ 
Olympus C770UZ 
Olympus C8080WZ 
Olympus E-1 
Olympus E-10 
Olympus E-20 
Olympus E-300 
Olympus E-500 
Olympus SP500UZ 
Panasonic DMC-FZ30 
Panasonic DMC-LC1 
Panasonic DMC-LX1 
Pentax *ist D 
Pentax *ist DL 
Pentax *ist DS 
Pentax Optio S 
Pentax Optio S4 
Pentax Optio 33WR 
Phase One LightPhase 
Phase One H10 
Phase One H20 
Phase One H25 
Phase One P20 
Phase One P25 
Pixelink A782
Polaroid x530
Rollei d530flex 
RoverShot 3320flex
Sigma SD9 
Sigma SD10 
Sinar 12582980-byte 
Sinar STI format
SMaL Ultra-Pocket 3
SMaL Ultra-Pocket 4
SMaL Ultra-Pocket 5
Sony DSC-F828 
Sony DSC-R1 
Sony DSC-V3 
STV680 VGA

> Canon EOS 20D is on the list. Is this different from a EOS D20?

Yup. Very different.

> There's a D30 on the list, wouldn't it have the same format as D20?

Nope.

The list doesn't have the 30D on there either and that camera has been
out close to a year (I have one). I learned the hard way that a Canon
..cr2 file produced by the 30D is different than the .cr2 file produced
by the 20D.

You can't just switch around the numbers and letters in a model
indicator because they look similar. And just because two or more
cameras produce image files using the same file extension (e.g., .cr2)
doesn't mean the files are compatible.

These are some of the reasons that image software lists very specific
model numbers that they support. If a software maker doesn't list your
camera's particular model number it is because they most likely don't
know that camera's image format and therefore can't read them with
their software.

> Looks like that could be programmed with a script and put on a tool-button to do most anything, even RAW formats not even known.

Sigh; where do people come up with this stuff?

-glenn-

On Oct 16, 8:22 pm, FrankLM <nospamfo...@nomail.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 14:03:47 -0500, "Sheen Gone" <sheeng...@wanadoo.es> wrote:
> >> The only real remedy at this time is to get PhotoLine 32 v13 or Serif
> >> PhotoPlus v11.
>
> >Wrong.
>
> >Photoline cannot read Canon's EOS D20 RAW format directly. Don't know about
> >Serif's.Below is a list from PhotoLine's website of all the RAW formats it can read.
>
> Canon EOS 20D is on the list. Is this different from a EOS D20? There's a D30 on
> the list, wouldn't it have the same format as D20? If Import > Digtal Camera RAW
> Data doesn't work, does the Import > RAW Image Data option work? Looks like that
> could be programmed with a script and put on a tool-button to do most anything,
> even RAW formats not even known. ... Nice, can save right to 16-bit TIFFs too.
>
> Adobe Digital Negative (DNG)
> AVT F-145C
> AVT F-201C
> AVT F-510C
> AVT F-810C
> Canon PowerShot 600
> Canon PowerShot A5
> Canon PowerShot A5 Zoom
> Canon PowerShot A50
> Canon PowerShot Pro70
> Canon PowerShot Pro90 IS
> Canon PowerShot G1
> Canon PowerShot G2
> Canon PowerShot G3
> Canon PowerShot G5
> Canon PowerShot G6
> Canon PowerShot S30
> Canon PowerShot S40
> Canon PowerShot S45
> Canon PowerShot S50
> Canon PowerShot S60
> Canon PowerShot S70
> Canon PowerShot Pro1
> Canon EOS D30
> Canon EOS D60
> Canon EOS 5D
> Canon EOS 10D
> Canon EOS 20D
> Canon EOS 300D
> Canon EOS 350D
> Canon EOS Digital Rebel
> Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT
> Canon EOS Kiss Digital
> Canon EOS D2000C
> Canon EOS-1D
> Canon EOS-1DS
> Canon EOS-1D Mark II
> Canon EOS-1D Mark II N
> Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II
> Casio QV-2000UX
> Casio QV-3000EX
> Casio QV-3500EX
> Casio QV-4000
> Casio QV-5700
> Casio QV-R51
> Casio QV-R61
> Casio EX-S100
> Casio EX-Z50
> Casio EX-Z55
> Casio Exlim Pro 505
> Casio Exlim Pro 600
> Casio Exlim Pro 700
> Contax N Digital
> Creative PC-CAM 600
> Epson R-D1
> Foculus 531C
> Fuji FinePix E550
> Fuji FinePix F700
> Fuji FinePix F710
> Fuji FinePix F800
> Fuji FinePix F810
> Fuji FinePix S2Pro
> Fuji FinePix S3Pro
> Fuji FinePix S20Pro
> Fuji FinePix S5000
> Fuji FinePix S5100/S5500
> Fuji FinePix S5200
> Fuji FinePix S7000
> Fuji FinePix S9000/S9500
> Imacon Ixpress 16-megapixel
> Imacon Ixpress 22-megapixel
> ISG 2020x1520
> Kodak DC20 (see Oliver Hartman's page)
> Kodak DC25 (see Jun-ichiro Itoh's page)
> Kodak DC40
> Kodak DC50
> Kodak DC120 (also try kdc2tiff)
> Kodak DCS315C
> Kodak DCS330C
> Kodak DCS420
> Kodak DCS460
> Kodak DCS460A
> Kodak DCS520C
> Kodak DCS560C
> Kodak DCS620C
> Kodak DCS620X
> Kodak DCS660C
> Kodak DCS660M
> Kodak DCS720X
> Kodak DCS760C
> Kodak DCS760M
> Kodak EOSDCS1
> Kodak EOSDCS3B
> Kodak NC2000F
> Kodak ProBack
> Kodak PB645C
> Kodak PB645H
> Kodak PB645M
> Kodak DCS Pro 14n
> Kodak DCS Pro 14nx
> Kodak DCS Pro SLR/c
> Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n
> Kodak P850
> Kodak P880
> Kodak KAI-0340
> Konica KD-400Z
> Konica KD-510Z
> Leaf Aptus 17
> Leaf Valeo 11
> Leaf Valeo 22
> Leaf Volare
> Leica Digilux 2
> Logitech Fotoman Pixtura
> Minolta RD175
> Minolta DiMAGE 5
> Minolta DiMAGE 7
> Minolta DiMAGE 7i
> Minolta DiMAGE 7Hi
> Minolta DiMAGE A1
> Minolta DiMAGE A2
> Minolta DiMAGE A200
> Minolta DiMAGE G400
> Minolta DiMAGE G500
> Minolta DiMAGE G600
> Minolta DiMAGE Z2
> Minolta Alpha/Dynax/Maxxum 7
> Minolta Alpha/Dynax/Maxxum 7D
> Nikon D1
> Nikon D1H
> Nikon D1X
> Nikon D100
> Nikon D2H
> Nikon D2Hs
> Nikon D2X
> Nikon D50
> Nikon D70
> Nikon D70s
> Nikon E700 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E800 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E880 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E900 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E950 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E990 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E995 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E2100 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E2500 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E3700 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E4300 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E4500 ("DIAG RAW" hack)
> Nikon E5000
> Nikon E5400
> Nikon E5700
> Nikon E8400
> Nikon E8700
> Nikon E8800
> Olympus C3030Z
> Olympus C5050Z
> Olympus C5060WZ
> Olympus C7070WZ
> Olympus C70Z,C7000Z
> Olympus C740UZ
> Olympus C770UZ
> Olympus C8080WZ
> Olympus E-1
> Olympus E-10
> Olympus E-20
> Olympus E-300
> Olympus E-500
> Olympus SP500UZ
> Panasonic DMC-FZ30
> Panasonic DMC-LC1
> Panasonic DMC-LX1
> Pentax *ist D
> Pentax *ist DL
> Pentax *ist DS
> Pentax Optio S
> Pentax Optio S4
> Pentax Optio 33WR
> Phase One LightPhase
> Phase One H10
> Phase One H20
> Phase One H25
> Phase One P20
> Phase One P25
> Pixelink A782
> Polaroid x530
> Rollei d530flex
> RoverShot 3320flex
> Sigma SD9
> Sigma SD10
> Sinar 12582980-byte
> Sinar STI format
> SMaL Ultra-Pocket 3
> SMaL Ultra-Pocket 4
> SMaL Ultra-Pocket 5
> Sony DSC-F828
> Sony DSC-R1
> Sony DSC-V3
> STV680 VGA

Sheen Gone wrote:
>>The only real remedy at this time is to get PhotoLine 32 v13 or Serif 
>>PhotoPlus v11.
> 
> 
> Wrong.
> 
> Photoline cannot read Canon's EOS D20 RAW format directly. Don't know about 
> Serif's.
> 
> Another remedy? Photoshop.
> 
> Sheen Gone 

You go, Sheen!!!!

:-)

Uni

> 
> 
> 

"GlennDoten" <gdoten@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1161052546.218437.32900@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Canon EOS 20D is on the list. Is this different from a EOS D20?
>
> Yup. Very different.

According to the Canon site (history museum - digital section) there is a
D30 and a D60 but no D20. People frequently transpose the leters/numbers
with this camera. Do you know where I could read about the D20 (all Google
comes up with for D20 are people who have accidentally got the name
wrong) - I'm curious.

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/digital/f_index.html


>
>> There's a D30 on the list, wouldn't it have the same format as D20?
>
> Nope.
>

This is correct and is different from the 30D also. The D30 was a precursor
to the D60 and was first released in 2000. The 10D followed the D60.

Julie 

>
> According to the Canon site (history museum - digital section) there 
> is a
> D30 and a D60 but no D20. People frequently transpose the 
> leters/numbers
> with this camera. Do you know where I could read about the D20 (all 
> Google
> comes up with for D20 are people who have accidentally got the name
> wrong) - I'm curious.
>
> http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/digital/f_index.html
>
>


If this is true, then Sheen Gone should try PhotoLine again because he 
was in error when he claimed PhotoLine wouldn't work with it. One of 
the authors of PhotoLine just reported that it supports the 20D just 
fine, and that Sheen probably tested his 20D on an earlier version of 
the software. They're now looking for a way to add in the 30D's RAW 
data-structure as soon as they can get a cr2 sample file for it. 
Anyone wanting an inexpensive and capable 16-bit solution that can 
also export RAW data in TIFF and JPG files, that also does HDR images 
(in 16-bit soon, a slight 8-bit bug that needs fixing), should send 
them a sample of your camera's RAW file so they can test it. You'll 
probably have all that you need in the next update. They seem to send 
out an update/upgrade every 1 or 2 weeks, as soon as bugs/improvements 
are reported/requested.

:-)

Ah, customer support like it used to be ...

It's so nice to see a software company that does it like in the ol' 
days before corporate greed became the norm and destroyed everything 
that was good about the software game.

"GlennDoten" <gdoten@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1161052546.218437.32900@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> The list doesn't have the 30D on there either and that camera has 
> been
> out close to a year (I have one). I learned the hard way that a 
> Canon
> .cr2 file produced by the 30D is different than the .cr2 file 
> produced
> by the 20D.
>

Interesting, I just downloaded what I strongly presume is a valid RAW 
file from a Canon 30D (judging by the discussion thread I found it in) 
and PhotoLine 32 opens it just fine just by double-clicking on it from 
Explorer. Which means it would also open it just fine right from the 
camera.

It's sounding like there's a few people that are just enjoying 
spreading lots of misinformation and lies about PhotoLine around here, 
like JoeB has done elsewhere. (It wouldn't be C-techs from Corel doing 
that, would it? Nah, couldn't be. :-) )

Nonetheless, it sure seems like they enjoy having RAW crow on their 
menus.


:-)

> It's sounding like there's a few people that are just enjoying spreading 
> lots of misinformation and lies about PhotoLine around here, like JoeB has 
> done elsewhere. (It wouldn't be C-techs from Corel doing that, would it? 
> Nah, couldn't be. :-) )

No sounding anywhere. The only truth is you are a fotoline ball-licker. Why 
don't you create a NG to praise it? This place belongs to unidiot to praise 
Irfanview, so  F. O.

Sheen Gone 



-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Sheen Gone" <sheengone@wanadoo.es> wrote in message 
news:4534f361$0$19614$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
>> It's sounding like there's a few people that are just enjoying 
>> spreading lots of misinformation and lies about PhotoLine around 
>> here, like JoeB has done elsewhere. (It wouldn't be C-techs from 
>> Corel doing that, would it? Nah, couldn't be. :-) )
>
> No sounding anywhere. The only truth is you are a fotoline 
> ball-licker. Why don't you create a NG to praise it? This place 
> belongs to unidiot to praise Irfanview, so  F. O.
>
> Sheen Gone

What's that I hear? Why it sounds like exactly like the noises of 
someone choosing to eat their sour-grapes. Or is it that hearty 
helping of RAW crow they're eating that makes them feel and act that 
way? So difficult to tell.  :-)

And what was it that I said not too long ago? Oh yes,

> Since so few people need help with PSP around here anymore (they're 
> all moving onto usable programs), we might as well turn this into a 
> support forum for all those trying out new graphic-editors. At least 
> for those editors that don't have their own news-group -- yet. Might 
> as well make some use out of the mess left behind by Corel.
>
> This way those familiar with PSP and needing help on how to do 
> things in their newer and better editors will find people familiar 
> with the migration process.
>
> (All PSP-cheerleaders crying to the contrary should be ignored. They 
> can crawl back to their Corel news-groups and beloved censoring 
> where they belong.)

On Oct 17, 5:17 am, "DJJohnson" <myem...@myserver.com> wrote:
> "GlennDoten" <gdo...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1161052546.218437.32900@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > The list doesn't have the 30D on there either and that camera has
> > been
> > out close to a year (I have one). I learned the hard way that a
> > Canon
> > .cr2 file produced by the 30D is different than the .cr2 file
> > produced
> > by the 20D.Interesting, I just downloaded what I strongly presume is a valid RAW
> file from a Canon 30D (judging by the discussion thread I found it in)
> and PhotoLine 32 opens it just fine just by double-clicking on it from
> Explorer. Which means it would also open it just fine right from the
> camera.

Well you're strong presumption was incorrect. I just installed
PhotoLine and it doesn't know how to read the .cr2 files from my 30D.
That's why the 30D is not listed as a supported image format on their
website.

And I just read you're posts in the PL forum where you posted some of
my post from here. The PL people admit that they don't know how to read
a 30D file. Also, you clearly don't know the Canon model numbers
(although I'll admit they are confusing). Canon sells a D30 camera and
a 30D camera. They are two very different cameras. A 30D is the
follow-on to the 20D. They both generate files with a .cr2 file
extension. But the FORMATS ARE DIFFERENT! A given image editing program
may be able to process a 20D .cr2 file but that doesn't mean the
program can process a 30D .cr2 file, unless the developers have
explicitly added support for the 30D format. I went through this with
Pixmantex's Raw Shooter Pro this past spring when I bought a 30D. (They
were then purchased by Adobe so I stopped using that program.)

Here's Canon's specs for the D30:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelTechSpecsSupportAct&fcategoryid=215&modelid=8294

Here's Canon's specs for the 30D:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelTechSpecsAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=12929

>
> It's sounding like there's a few people that are just enjoying
> spreading lots of misinformation and lies about PhotoLine around here,
> like JoeB has done elsewhere. (It wouldn't be C-techs from Corel doing
> that, would it? Nah, couldn't be. :-) )

If you're referring to me then you're smoking crack, dude! :-)

>
> Nonetheless, it sure seems like they enjoy having RAW crow on their
> menus.

I was going to post in the PL forum (www.pl32.com) but couldn't get
past the German registration instructions and German commands since
unfortunately I only read English. Go get your facts correct in the PL
forum then come back here and talk to me. :-)

> 
> :-)

"GlennDoten" <gdoten@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1161136054.287098.46680@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Well you're strong presumption was incorrect. I just installed
> PhotoLine and it doesn't know how to read the .cr2 files from my 
> 30D.
> That's why the 30D is not listed as a supported image format on 
> their
> website.
>

How odd, the 30D sample image that I found online and posted about has 
the following EXIF info. I copied this EXIF info directly from the 
EXIF display WITHIN PhotoLine 32's browser (as well as being able to 
view/edit/save/etc.the image from within the editor). So, either Canon 
is changing their formats in mid-stream in the same model number or 
you don't have a more recent version of PhotoLine. Which is it? That 
30D down there sure doesn't look like any D30 to me.


Manufacturer: Canon
Model: Canon EOS 30D

Shooting Date/Time: 05/11/2006, 2:29:58 pm

Exposure Time: 1/80 sec.

F Number: F/8.0

Exposure Program: Aperture Priority

ISO Speed Rating: ISO-400

Date/Time Original: 05/11/2006, 2:29:58 pm

Date/Time Digitized: 05/11/2006, 2:29:58 pm

Shutter Speed: 1/6 sec.

Aperture Value: 6.00

Exposure Bias Value: +0.67

Flash: Off

Focal Length: 700.0 mm

Color Space: undefined

White Balance Automatic

On Oct 17, 3:09 am, "JulieM" <j...@PANTShardgate.net> wrote:
> "GlennDoten" <gdo...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1161052546.218437.32900@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> Canon EOS 20D is on the list. Is this different from a EOS D20?
>
> > Yup. Very different.
>According to the Canon site (history museum - digital section) there is a
> D30 and a D60 but no D20. People frequently transpose the leters/numbers
> with this camera. Do you know where I could read about the D20 (all Google
> comes up with for D20 are people who have accidentally got the name
> wrong) - I'm curious.

My mistake, Julie. I can't find a D20 either. Although the question
that was posed, "Canon EOS 20D is on the list. Is this different from a
EOS D20?" is nonsensical. But my answer "yup" is sort of true in that
the D20 is so different it doesn't exist. (ha ha)

-glenn-

On Oct 13, 2:24 pm, aeran...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have just downloaded the most recent trial version to test it out,
> but when I plug in the camera nothing happens, when I try to import
> from camera, nothing also happens. I can manually upload the photos to
> the harddisc and then open them (format: cr2).
>
> Anybody with an idea on what I can do to rememdy the problem? I am
> using windows xp service pack 2.

So, the real question here is not whether PSP can read the 20D .cr2
format (I'll assume you meant 20D and not D20) but why the files are
not being downloaded to the PC.

When you plug the camera into a USB port does XP see it? (Maybe try
Control Panel -> Scanners and Cameras after plugging the camera in).

-glenn-

On Oct 17, 10:01 pm, "DJJohnson" <myem...@myserver.com> wrote:
> "GlennDoten" <gdo...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1161136054.287098.46680@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Well you're strong presumption was incorrect. I just installed
> > PhotoLine and it doesn't know how to read the .cr2 files from my
> > 30D.
> > That's why the 30D is not listed as a supported image format on
> > their
> > website.How odd, the 30D sample image that I found online and posted about has
> the following EXIF info. I copied this EXIF info directly from the
> EXIF display WITHIN PhotoLine 32's browser (as well as being able to
> view/edit/save/etc.the image from within the editor). So, either Canon
> is changing their formats in mid-stream in the same model number or
> you don't have a more recent version of PhotoLine. Which is it? That
> 30D down there sure doesn't look like any D30 to me.
>
> Manufacturer: Canon
> Model: Canon EOS 30D
>
> Shooting Date/Time: 05/11/2006, 2:29:58 pm
>
> Exposure Time: 1/80 sec.
>
> F Number: F/8.0
>
> Exposure Program: Aperture Priority
>
> ISO Speed Rating: ISO-400
>
> Date/Time Original: 05/11/2006, 2:29:58 pm
>
> Date/Time Digitized: 05/11/2006, 2:29:58 pm
>
> Shutter Speed: 1/6 sec.
>
> Aperture Value: 6.00
>
> Exposure Bias Value: +0.67
>
> Flash: Off
>
> Focal Length: 700.0 mm
>
> Color Space: undefined
>
> White Balance Automatic

Yes, it is odd, isn't it? Been there; seen that. PL can *open* the file
but doen't know how to disply it correctly. That's why you call the
..cr2 file a non-standard one (whatever that means--it's either a 30D
..cr2 or it isn't) over in the PL forum--it's not the file that's wrong,
it's that PL doesn't know how to process the metadata properly. You're
developer friends over at the PL forum can tell you why and how this
happens. Try opening your file in PL and PSP at the same time and
you'll see the problem.

-glenn-

"GlennDoten" <gdoten@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1161139661.218297.93160@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Yes, it is odd, isn't it? Been there; seen that. PL can *open* the 
> file
> but doen't know how to disply it correctly. That's why you call the
> .cr2 file a non-standard one (whatever that means--it's either a 30D
> .cr2 or it isn't) over in the PL forum--it's not the file that's 
> wrong,
> it's that PL doesn't know how to process the metadata properly. 
> You're
> developer friends over at the PL forum can tell you why and how this
> happens. Try opening your file in PL and PSP at the same time and
> you'll see the problem.
>

And here I thought it was that Canon (or the photographer) that was 
the fault of producing such an underexposed photo. When I saw how much 
lateral chromatic aberration and blur was in their lens used to take 
that shot, it was an obvious conclusion that Canon must have that 
little quality control over-all. (From having used other photography 
equipment, this makes me take pause now on if I should bother moving 
to Canon, which I would have liked for their CMOS support.)

Your previous statements of "...can't read them...", and now more 
recently "I just installed
PhotoLine and it doesn't know how to read the .cr2 files from my 30D." 
leads one to believe that the software can't even display them at all. 
This is not true. I also find that by using the (quite admirable) 
"Light/Shadow" tool in PhotoLine I can make the image look just like 
the display in PSP. (FWIW, Serif PhotoPlus could only display a blank 
black image with this 30D file.)

Now that the authors of PL32 have a 30D sample file to use, I have a 
feeling that it will fully support 30D RAW images in the next release 
as well as it supports all others, including the 20D (and your 
hallucinogenic D20 (crack is it?)). I wonder how long it'll take PSP 
to include an HDR tool (better than one available in PS), and/or allow 
you to save RAW images to 16bit TIFFs? Want to take bets on which of 
the two programs resolves all three issues first? (In just this one 
little area of image manipulation capabilities no less. PL32 has 
already surpassed both PSP and PS in many other areas.) 

On Oct 17, 11:26 pm, "DJJohnson" <myem...@myserver.com> wrote:
> "GlennDoten" <gdo...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1161139661.218297.93160@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Yes, it is odd, isn't it? Been there; seen that. PL can *open* the
> > file
> > but doen't know how to disply it correctly. That's why you call the
> > .cr2 file a non-standard one (whatever that means--it's either a 30D
> > .cr2 or it isn't) over in the PL forum--it's not the file that's
> > wrong,
> > it's that PL doesn't know how to process the metadata properly.
> > You're
> > developer friends over at the PL forum can tell you why and how this
> > happens. Try opening your file in PL and PSP at the same time and
> > you'll see the problem.
>And here I thought it was that Canon (or the photographer) that was
> the fault of producing such an underexposed photo. When I saw how much
> lateral chromatic aberration and blur was in their lens used to take
> that shot, it was an obvious conclusion that Canon must have that
> little quality control over-all. (From having used other photography
> equipment, this makes me take pause now on if I should bother moving
> to Canon, which I would have liked for their CMOS support.)

What are you going on about? Canon equipment is excellent, as is the
equipment made by other manufacturers. Anyone who opens a Canon
30D-produced .cr2 file would know immediately that the imaging software
is broken. You know how you like to say that PSP saves a 16-bit/channel
image to an 8-bit TIFF without warning you? Well, PL likes to pretend
to be able to open a 30D .cr2 file when it actually doesn't know how
to. AND IT DOESN'T WARN YOU ABOUT THIS. Egads! What is this world
coming to?!

>
> Your previous statements of "...can't read them...", and now more
> recently "I just installed
> PhotoLine and it doesn't know how to read the .cr2 files from my 30D."
> leads one to believe that the software can't even display them at all.
> This is not true. I also find that by using the (quite admirable)
> "Light/Shadow" tool in PhotoLine I can make the image look just like
> the display in PSP. (FWIW, Serif PhotoPlus could only display a blank
> black image with this 30D file.)

Wrong again, buck-o. PL does NOT know how to open a 30D .cr2 file. IT
CANNOT PROPERLY READ THEM. It can read the TIFF structure of the file
but it doesn't know what to do with the structures that Canon does not
publish. It's no ujse displaying the image incorrectly. The software
should be honest and say, "sorry, I don't know how to process the
metadata in this file." PL doesn't do that, but rather shows some
perversion of the image. What good is that. That's what I mean by PL
doesn't know how to open the file. It doesn't. Accept the facts, it
won't hurt.

>
> Now that the authors of PL32 have a 30D sample file to use, I have a
> feeling that it will fully support 30D RAW images in the next release
> as well as it supports all others, including the 20D (and your
> hallucinogenic D20 (crack is it?)). I wonder how long it'll take PSP
> to include an HDR tool (better than one available in PS), and/or allow
> you to save RAW images to 16bit TIFFs? Want to take bets on which of
> the two programs resolves all three issues first? (In just this one
> little area of image manipulation capabilities no less. PL32 has
> already surpassed both PSP and PS in many other areas.)

Blah, blah, blah.

"GlennDoten" <gdoten@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1161204924.493565.207250@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Wrong again, buck-o. PL does NOT know how to open a 30D .cr2 file. 
> IT
> CANNOT PROPERLY READ THEM. It can read the TIFF structure of the 
> file
> but it doesn't know what to do with the structures that Canon does 
> not
> publish. It's no ujse displaying the image incorrectly. The software
> should be honest and say, "sorry, I don't know how to process the
> metadata in this file." PL doesn't do that, but rather shows some
> perversion of the image. What good is that. That's what I mean by PL
> doesn't know how to open the file. It doesn't. Accept the facts, it
> won't hurt.
>

What are you going on about? You are clearly wailing against a 
non-existent problem. You yourself said that the 30D was not on their 
"supported cameras" list. I was just surprised that it would open it 
at all (and to top it off, you can even get the intended image out of 
the RAW data with some minor tweaking). Not only that, but you even 
state right here that Canon does not publish that information, so how 
are they going to fix the problem for YOUR camera if you don't submit 
an image that they can analyze? Now that they are aware that 30D 
owners might like their file-format supported, and that I took my 
valuable time to find a sample image they could use to help YOU, I'm 
sure that'll change and you can stop your whining about a non-existent 
problem.

Instead, expend your energy whining about how Corel has failed you. 
You'll have volumes of REAL problems to whine about. (Oh look, there's 
already volumes of complaints published by Corel on their own 
news-servers. Go join them.)

:-)

All this just because I corrected their lies about PL32 failing to 
support the Canon EOS-20D (or in some delusional people's minds, the 
EOS-D20).

One more thing -- to circumvent your monolingual limits, I helped the 
PL32 folks last night so their forums will now allow you to see their 
registration information in English (if your browser or OS is set to 
English). You will no doubt make good use of their forums one day 
(with all the help that you appear to need at every turn) after you 
eventually quit your tantrums over PL32 clearly being the better 
software. 

On Oct 18, 6:35 pm, "DJJohnson" <myem...@myserver.com> wrote:
> "GlennDoten" <gdo...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1161204924.493565.207250@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Wrong again, buck-o. PL does NOT know how to open a 30D .cr2 file.
> > IT
> > CANNOT PROPERLY READ THEM. It can read the TIFF structure of the
> > file
> > but it doesn't know what to do with the structures that Canon does
> > not
> > publish. It's no ujse displaying the image incorrectly. The software
> > should be honest and say, "sorry, I don't know how to process the
> > metadata in this file." PL doesn't do that, but rather shows some
> > perversion of the image. What good is that. That's what I mean by PL
> > doesn't know how to open the file. It doesn't. Accept the facts, it
> > won't hurt.

>What are you going on about? You are clearly wailing against a
> non-existent problem. You yourself said that the 30D was not on their
> "supported cameras" list. I was just surprised that it would open it
> at all (and to top it off, you can even get the intended image out of
> the RAW data with some minor tweaking).

Quite incorrect; which part of my problem description did you not
understand? Once more for those at the back of the classroom: For Canon
30D owners PL is not an option because it cannot open the .cr2 files
the camera produces. It is impossible for PL to pull the "intended
image" out of a .cr2 file. Period. Why don't you ask this in the PL
forum? Afraid of the truth? The developers have already said that PL
does no read a 30D .cr2 file. Why don't you believe them?

>Not only that, but you even
> state right here that Canon does not publish that information, so how
> are they going to fix the problem for YOUR camera if you don't submit
> an image that they can analyze?

How is it my problem that the PL people can't afford to buy or rent a
30D?

>Now that they are aware that 30D
> owners might like their file-format supported, and that I took my
> valuable time to find a sample image they could use to help YOU, I'm
> sure that'll change and you can stop your whining about a non-existent
> problem.

Of course the problem exists! Otherwise the PL people wouldm't need
..cr2 files, would they? I don't use PL in my workflow so I don't care
if they fix their lack of support for 30D .cr2 files or not.

>
> Instead, expend your energy whining about how Corel has failed you.

PSP has never "failed" me, and I never said that it had. It is one of
many tools that fits nicely into my workflow. Thanks for asking.

> You'll have volumes of REAL problems to whine about. (Oh look, there's
> already volumes of complaints published by Corel on their own
> news-servers. Go join them.)

I have no complaints with PSP. It has served me well over the pasr
decade. Again, thanks for asking.

>
> One more thing -- to circumvent your monolingual limits, I helped the
> PL32 folks last night so their forums will now allow you to see their
> registration information in English (if your browser or OS is set to
> English). You will no doubt make good use of their forums one day
> (with all the help that you appear to need at every turn) after you
> eventually quit your tantrums over PL32 clearly being the better
> software.

No, I won't be in their forums. I have no reason to be. But yet again,
thanks for asking.

Oh, and why do you keep putting words into my mouth? I never implied,
or let alone said, that PSP is better software than PL or vice versa. A
good digital photographer will use many software tools in their digital
darkroom and they'll choose the various software products that works
for them. Why does that bother you so much? You can keep trying to
belittle people in your posts all you want (they sure don't bother me)
but at the end of the day people will choose the software that works
for them.

"GlennDoten" <gdoten@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1161214383.514059.166480@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>

<inane ranting snipped>

I don't care to provide an emotional outlet for those that continually 
display having none in their real lives.


:-)

On Oct 18, 8:44 pm, "DJJohnson" <myem...@myserver.com> wrote:
> "GlennDoten" <gdo...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1161214383.514059.166480@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> <inane ranting snipped>
>
> I don't care to provide an emotional outlet for those that continually
> display having none in their real lives.
>
> :-)

I didn't think you'd be up for a calm, rational discussion.

You just keep belittling people; I'm sure it helps you tremendously in
your day-to-day life.

:-)