Image Quality of Lightroom vs Nikon Image Processing Software

Is anyone out there of the opinion that the quality of images displayed in Lightroom is not as good as when using Nikon's software (for NEF jpeg files)? I am working with some photographers who think so. I love using lightroom and trying to determine if 1)if there is any legitimacy to there opinions, 2) if any others are experiencing the same thing, and 3) if true, how come?

It's not the monitor calibration that makes the difference, it's the way the RAW engine cooks the image. The calibration mentioned above is meant to mean using the Camera Calibration panel and to tweak the colors to match. I posted a thread a week or so ago, about how I managed to match (to my tastes) the look produced by CaptureNX within Lightroom. Hope this is useful in some way.
http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc80a90/0

Similar Messages

  • NOT happy with image quality of Lightroom 1.1

    Sure, LR now launches faster and the interface looks a bit nicer. And the more capable sharpening controls and the clarity slider which mimics contrast enhancement with USM are nice additions, but has anyone else notice what happened to the image quality?
    First, while formerly LR and ACR struck a great balance between detail and noise suppressionerring on the side of maintaining detail even at the expense of slightly higher noise levelsit appears the goal for the redesign has been to minimize the appearance of noise at all costs. It just so happens that yesterday afternoon, I'd shot some available light candids (up to ISO 800) of the staff at a local health care facility and was intent on using them as a trial run on Lightroom 1.1. Well, the difference in image quality jumped right out at me: there was no granular noise at all remaining, even in the ISO 800 shots, but neither was there any fine detail. I use a Canon 5D, and while I'm accustomed to slightly higher levels of chroma noise, images up to ISO 1600 in even the worse lighting are always full of fine detail. Fine structures like strands of hair and eye lashes have now lost their delicacy, and have instead become coarse, unnaturally painterly analogs. Looking into shadow areas, I can see the results of what seems to be luminance noise smearing at work, obliterating noise and detail along with it. I never used Raw Shooter because I'm a Mac user (2x2GHz G5 w/2GB RAM and 250GB HD), but if this is the result of incorporating Pixmantic's technology, the result is not a positive one from my standpoint. The images I shot yesterday are to be cropped to 4:5 proportions, then printed 20" x 25", at which size the processing artifacts and lack of fine detail in these LR1.1 conversions becomes even more apparent. I've even tried turning off all image processing options: Clarity, Sharpening and NR (neither of which I ever use in RAW conversion, anyway)... It simply seems this noise smearing is part of the baseline RAW processing, and it really, really bites. Am I missing something? Is there some way to actually turn off this processing that looks uncomfortably like the "watercolor" noise reduction that Kodak and Panasonic use for their compact digicams. Yuck!
    Secondly, is there a way to get back the suppression of hot and stuck pixels that LR used to perform? Now, my high ISO files are riddled with them, the same as they would be when converted with Aperture or Canon's DPP. Default suppression of hot and stuck pixels was a major advantage of LR/ACR, and contributed in no small bit to my adoption of LR as my standard tool for RAW conversion due to the amount of high ISO, low light photography I do. What's even worse, is that the random-color speckles are now smudged into the image along with all the other noise data that's being smoothed out, resulting in images that looks more like impressionist paintings than photographs.
    I thought about reinstalling LR1.0 and just continuing to use that, but if LR1.1 is an indication of the direction Adobe is going to take in the development of the software, I really don't see the point of continuing to use the softwareparticularly when I had a few existing problems with LR1.0 that were never resolved, such as crashing during the import of photos from a memory card and progressively slower preview rendering as the size of my library increased. So, I'm probably going to go back to using Aperture, which is itself not free of IQ foibles, but certainly looks much more attractive now in comparison to LR1.1.
    Anybody notice the same things with IQ? Anybody got any suggestions of how to get more natural-looking conversions before I remove LR and go back to Aperture?

    Jeff,
    I mean no disrespect. But I would like to see samples of 1.1 compared to 1.0 of the same image (ISO 400, and/or 800), because I do not want to convert my library to a catalog until I know whether or not I like the image quality. Why is it so hard to get one good sample. That is all I am asking. I would just rather not jump through hoops to go back to 1.0 if I do not like 1.1....That is all
    And yes, after well over 400 printed articles I can tell what an image will look like in print when I view it 1:1.... I can tell if the eyelashes or pores on someones face, the detail in a rug, or wood grain will be detailed on the off set printed page if I look at the image at 1:1 and see smudging...this means to me that the most detail possible is NOT going to translate to the page. If however I CAN see detail in those types of areas, clearly (ie no smudging), than I know that I will see those fine details on the page. If these fine details were not important than we would all still be shooting with 3 and 4 mp cameras. Those fine details that are only visible to our eyes at a 1:1 preview on screen, are important on the printed page.
    Oh, and I am not chest thumping. You can check my history here, I do not have a history of that type of activity. I am simply asking to see samples before I update....
    I am very discriminating Pro, not some over testing, too much time on my hands, complaining , over paid amateur who only has time to complain that their test chart is out of focus. Or that they can measure toooo much noise at ISO what ever, instead of actually making photos. I actually make my living taking photos. And my clients have come to expect a certain level of quality from me. They comment all the time how much higher quality my images are than some of the other photogs they use. And I am still shooting a D60, where as these others are shooting 5d's and D2X's.
    Jeff, I am not against you or Adobe. Matter of fact, I LOVE LR. It has changed my work flow in a very positive direction. I think it is wonderful. I just want one sample.... I am asking nicely: Please with sugar on top :)
    If you can't give me a sample, than please at least reassure me that it will be easy to go back to 1.0 for the time being. Is it as easy as uninstalling 1.1, reinstalling 1.0 and recovering my DB from a current backup? If so, than fine, I will go this route........... If not, than I am hoping for a sample.
    Thank you very kindly Jeff for engaging in this lively conversation. I do appreciate your comments and participation on this forum. And please note that none of this is said with attitude or malice. I know that some times a writers intent or emotional state is easy to misinterpret in a forum like this. So please know that I am calm and not angry, just curious about image quality.
    Ok. I will shut up now. Thanks again

  • Editing and image quality in Lightroom

    Hello all,
    I am a new Lightroom user (Lightroom 5) and I've watched several tutorial videos and I've had a lot of fun playing around with the program.  I've noticed that Lightroom is said to be "non-destructive" when it comes to editing.  Apparently, you can do all the editing you want to an image (i.e. adjusting exposure, cropping, etc.) and there is no loss of image quality as you edit.  Is this correct?
    I would hate to think that my tinkering around with the editing tools results in loss of image quality each time I change something.  ("Hmm, I like that exposure.  Now let me adjust shadows.  No....that doesn't look right when I do that.  I'll just change the exposure a bit more...."!  I intend to put photos onto an image hosting site and present them, so I want the quality to be the best it can be!
    I appreciate any help anyone can offer.
    Cheers,
    Tom

    I am a new Lightroom user (Lightroom 5) and I've watched several tutorial videos and I've had a lot of fun playing around with the program.  I've noticed that Lightroom is said to be "non-destructive" when it comes to editing.  Apparently, you can do all the editing you want to an image (i.e. adjusting exposure, cropping, etc.) and there is no loss of image quality as you edit.  Is this correct?
    I know of no image editing software that causes loss of image quality when you make an edit. Editing steps simply cause a change to the image based on the edit you perform, not a loss of quality. This is true of Lightroom and every other image editor that I know of.
    If you choose to save (or in Lightroom do an export) as a JPG, then there is a loss of image quality each time you perform a save as a JPG. If you need to have a JPG of your edited photo for some reason, then this loss of image quality is unavoidable, but in most cases you won't even notice. Thus, in Lightroom, creating a JPG from the edited photo is the LAST step in the process, thereby minimizing the image quality loss.

  • Image-processing plugins

    Any further news on 3rd-parties being able to extend LR with image-processing plugins yet?    When the SDK was first announced, it was described by Adobe as a 'preview' SDK and that a full SDK, allowing image-processing and other plugins, would be forthcoming.
    Keen coders want to know.
    Thanks,
    John.

    John,
    No news on the image processing API front.  We're a small team and prioritizing aggressively to meet photographers' expectations.  To that end, we are more focused on workflow APIs than image processing APIs.  Here are a couple blog posts I've written on the topic:
    http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2007/11/lightroom_13_the_export_sdk_pr.html
    http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2008/08/plugin_or_external_editor.html
    Can you give me an idea of the image processing plug-in you'd like to create?  I know that some of the largest plug-in manufacturers have been willing to accept the external editor compromise for the time being.
    Regards,
    Tom Hogarty
    Lightroom, Camera Raw, DNG Product Manager

  • Batch image processing from bridge cause photoshop to crash

    But first it goes ahead and processes the images selected in Bridge. All of them like even over a hundred at a time (great time saver!). Then displays a message for each image in one error dialogue saying, "Sorry Photoshop couldn't process the image. . ." for each image.
    It also saves the images to the a folder above (in hierarchy) instead of the folder I select in the batch dialogue. I've tried using Batch process from within Photoshop and get the same result as image process from Bridge.
    While I am able to do the processing I need, it's annoying to have the force quit Photoshop each time, and Then to move the processed images where they belong.
    I am on a G5, 4mb ram, OSX 10.4.11. Photoshop CS3 #10.0.1, and bridge CS3 # 2.1.1.9.
    I usually do the updates when I'm alerted, but haven't heard of anything recently.
    Any ideas?

    Hi SSPrengel
    OK - maybe this will shed some light
    Try changing the size to something very small.- see below
    Try changing the compression. Not affected by the level of Quality (2% 50% or 100%) - all fail to load
    Try changing whether a color-profile is embedded or not. Not an option AFAIK in LR Export
    Try changing if the metadata is minimized or not. Not an option AFAIK in LR Export
    Try changing if the JPGs are exported relative to the source image or some fixed location. Exported to a specific location.
    If I use the Image export resize option it loads OK (resize to 1000*673 from 3916*2634).
    Older exports (from LR2.3 and earlier, of the same size image, and source DNG are OK)
    A centre crop from the Image (1205*691) is OK. A marginal crop (2 edges)  (3838*2552) is OK whereas a very slight crop at (3693*2614) FAILS
    The camera is Leica M8, images is in Leica RAW format (DNG).
    It appears to be function of Image export size (reduced either by Cropping or by 'Resizing on Export'
    Looks like a bug in LR2.6
    Message was edited by: V64
    PS I am using a G5 PowerMac with Tiger OSX

  • Bridge CS4 - Image processing into subfolders

    Design Premium CS4
    Bridge 3.0.0.464
    XP Pro SP3
    Problem: Image processing into subfolders
    I have a folder with several subfolders containing JPG files.
    I want to reduce the file size by reducing the quality.
    I use the following to do this:
    Tools | Photoshop | Image Processor
    Bridge doesn't appear to have the smarts to traverse down into the subfolders i.e. one has to do each folder individually.
    Is there a way to have Bridge image process down into the subfolders? Thanks in advance.

    This is a job for Photoshop not Bridge, Bridge can not alter the JPEG settings.
    This Photoshop script should do what you want if you are talking about normal JPEGS and not Save for Web.
    #target photoshop
    var imageFolder = Folder.selectDialog("Select the folder with JPGs to process " + $.getenv("username"));
    var quality = prompt("PLease enter quality required 1-12 ",5);
    if (imageFolder != null)  processFolder(imageFolder);
    function processFolder(folder) {
        var fileList = folder.getFiles()
         for (var i = 0; i < fileList.length; i++) {
            var file = fileList[i];
      if (file instanceof File && file.name.match(/\.jpg$/i)) {
       open(file);
    saveFile(quality);
    app.activeDocument.close(SaveOptions.DONOTSAVECHANGES);  
      } else
    if (file instanceof Folder) {
           processFolder(file);
    function saveFile(quality){
    saveOptions = new JPEGSaveOptions();
    saveOptions.embedColorProfile = true;
    saveOptions.formatOptions = FormatOptions.STANDARDBASELINE;
    saveOptions.matte = MatteType.NONE;
    saveOptions.quality = quality;  
    var fileRef = new File(decodeURI(activeDocument.fullName.fsName));
    activeDocument.saveAs(fileRef,saveOptions);

  • Best RAW Image Processing for Canon Digital Rebel XT - PS Elements 6??

    I'm new to RAW image processing and image editing. I just bought a Canon digital Rebel XT. It comes with Canon Digital Professional 2.1 software. I also have Aperture upgraded to 1.5.6, which I have tried on JPEGs from an earlier digital camera that only gave me JPEG files. Since Aperture doesn't give me as much editing diversity, I purchased the newly released Photoshop Elements 6 (and I don't have any experience with Photoshop). Thus, I now have 3 different RAW image processors. Does anyone have some experience with these 3 to suggest which one is best? The learning curve looks pretty steep, and it would be helpful to know which of these to focus on, at least initially.
    Thanks in advance for the help!

    Disgruntled3x wrote:
    I'm new to RAW image processing and image editing. I just bought a Canon digital Rebel XT. It comes with Canon Digital Professional 2.1 software. I also have Aperture upgraded to 1.5.6, which I have tried on JPEGs from an earlier digital camera that only gave me JPEG files. Since Aperture doesn't give me as much editing diversity, I purchased the newly released Photoshop Elements 6 (and I don't have any experience with Photoshop). Thus, I now have 3 different RAW image processors. Does anyone have some experience with these 3 to suggest which one is best? The learning curve looks pretty steep, and it would be helpful to know which of these to focus on, at least initially.
    Thanks in advance for the help!
    Now that you have the Canon DPP installed i would update it to version 3.2 which is at Canons site.
    Now, DPP has the best conversion quality for Canon RAW files. I used it a lot and although limited in what adjustments you have, it offers the essential adjustments and I liked it a lot.
    Aperture also does a great job with Canon RAW files, but version 2.1 is even better
    Photoshop Elements 6 I have not used but I do use Photoshop CS3
    Personally for RAW I prefer Canon DPP over Adobe Camera Raw
    And I prefer Aperture over Adobe Camera RAW too.
    Now that Aperture has improved it's RAW conversion immensely and it offers tethered shooting with the XT, I am using Aperture exclusively to process RAW files.
    An application like Elements or Photoshop CS3 are great if you want to do more advanced layered work and layer blending effects, however, for sepia , black/white, general image color & saturation or desaturated effects and good RAW conversion? I am all about using Aperture.
    Now although I use it on a MBP, I will only do edit and color judging when attached to a cinema display or any good LCD with a DVI connection to the laptop.
    But in conclusion, for RAW adjustments may as well focus on Aperture and use Elements for the few edits that Aperture does not allow.

  • O.T. ToneUp S3 Raw Image Processing

    ToneUp S3 is a powerful image processing application capable of handling RAW camera images as well as standard image formats such as JPG or TIFFs
    Online download $15
    Full Feature List :-
    Raw Images - Loading and saving of raw images allows you to adjust your digital negatives and save them (non-destructively)
    Tethered shooting - Take shots via your PC and automatically transfer them back to ToneUp. Set up Time-Lapse photography to record images over a set time span - Windows Vista / XP only
    Powerful Image browser - manage your images quickly and easily, and batch convert as required
    Post Processing - Adjust brightness, exposure, contrast, sharpness, saturation, channel mixing, colour balance, white balance or tonal curve
    Image manipulation - Crop, rotate or resize your images ready for print
    High-Speed Rendering - Optimised for speed to give you real-time visual feedback on your post processing
    Extensive Tonal Curve Features - Including uploading into your DSLR (Nikon Only), access to the ToneUp Online Curve Database and Curve-Browsing, allowing fast comparison of curves
    Image Printing - fully integrated with Microsoft Windows Printers
    Independent Image Settings - Allowing you to process single or multiple image at the same time, share settings between images or save them for future use
    Flexible Interface - Supporting Free Floating or Docked tools, allowing you to arrange your workspace to suit your needs
    ToneUp S3 is compatible with most Digital Camera RAW formats.
    http://www.toneupstudio.com/

    ToneUp S3 is a powerful image processing application capable of handling RAW camera images as well as standard image formats such as JPG or TIFFs
    Online download $15
    Full Feature List :-
    Raw Images - Loading and saving of raw images allows you to adjust your digital negatives and save them (non-destructively)
    Tethered shooting - Take shots via your PC and automatically transfer them back to ToneUp. Set up Time-Lapse photography to record images over a set time span - Windows Vista / XP only
    Powerful Image browser - manage your images quickly and easily, and batch convert as required
    Post Processing - Adjust brightness, exposure, contrast, sharpness, saturation, channel mixing, colour balance, white balance or tonal curve
    Image manipulation - Crop, rotate or resize your images ready for print
    High-Speed Rendering - Optimised for speed to give you real-time visual feedback on your post processing
    Extensive Tonal Curve Features - Including uploading into your DSLR (Nikon Only), access to the ToneUp Online Curve Database and Curve-Browsing, allowing fast comparison of curves
    Image Printing - fully integrated with Microsoft Windows Printers
    Independent Image Settings - Allowing you to process single or multiple image at the same time, share settings between images or save them for future use
    Flexible Interface - Supporting Free Floating or Docked tools, allowing you to arrange your workspace to suit your needs
    ToneUp S3 is compatible with most Digital Camera RAW formats.
    http://www.toneupstudio.com/

  • Fixed 5.2rc: ...images processed with PV2003 were adding a post-crop vignette...

    From the release notes:
      "Catalog containing images processed with PV2003 were adding a post-crop vignette when catalog upgraded to Lightroom 5"
    Does that mean all my PV2003 images (10,000+) now have a post-crop vignette included in their edit history?  Or some?  Or some special combination?
    I converted my v4.4 catalogue a couple of days after v5.0 was released, so I really don't want to go back to my old v4.4 catalogue and re-convert...
    Any ideas?

    The "fix" works as follows:
    1. If you use LR5.2 RC to upgrade a catalog containg some PV2003 images, there will be no issue....i.e. you will not see the unexpected "Post Crop Vignette Style: Paint Overlay" entry in the develop History.
    2. If you open an LR5 catalog which was created by upgrading from an earlier version using LR5.0, any PV2003 images will STILL show the "Post Crop Vignette Style: Paint Overlay" entry in the develop History, BUT it will no longer have the problem of losing all intervening history steps should you click on a prior history step.
    3. Any already-lost history steps caused by the problem in LR5.0 will remain lost.

  • 8 vs 10-bit (FCP) image processing.

    Is there a noticeable difference between FC Express (8-bit) vs FCP 5 (10-bit) image processing (my DV camera is 12-bit)?
    Thanks for the info!

    FCE isn't 8-bit.
    According to the Apple website, FCE uses 8-bit image processing (while FCP 5 uses 10-bit):
    http://www.apple.com/finalcut/index.html
    (scroll down to "editing" section)
    And your DV camera being 12-bit? That is referring to the AUDIO.
    I have a Panasonic DVX100B, and the audio is PCM 16 bit, 48 KHz sampling. I am refering to the image processing. The video analog-to-digital converters are 12-bit, but you're right DV is quantized to 8-bit.
    FCP 5 handles not only DV, but UNCOMPRESSED 8-bit and 10-bit formats. FCE does not...it only handles DV. Noticable difference? Only to an engineer who scrutinizes the image.
    So, FCP 5 only uses 10-bit processing when working with uncompressed files? Thanks for the info. Sorry, I'm still a little confused.
    If I'm working in standard-definition DV, will FC Express still give me the best image quality available?

  • Image Processing in C#

    What I want to do is as in the following.
    1. Load image from jpg/bmp file and display on the PictureBox or any other image control keeping image ratio
    2. Perform Image Processing, for example, zoom in/zoom out, change brightness/contrast
    Does any .NET class supports this? or should I implement it with my own code?
    If I should make my own code, is the PictureBox optimal control?

    Hmm.  If you don't know where to start then maybe the do-it-yourself approach is not going to work for you.
    Here's code for a simple control you can use to display an image with a transform matrix and a color matrix.
    using System;
    using System.Drawing;
    using System.Drawing.Drawing2D;
    using System.Drawing.Imaging;
    using System.Windows.Forms;
    class ImageControl : Control
    public Image Image
    get
    return image;
    set
    image = value;
    Invalidate();
    private Image image;
    public Matrix Transform
    get
    return transform;
    set
    transform = value;
    Invalidate();
    private Matrix transform = new Matrix();
    public ColorMatrix ColorMatrix
    get
    return colorMatrix;
    set
    colorMatrix = value;
    Invalidate();
    private ColorMatrix colorMatrix = new ColorMatrix();
    protected override void OnResize( EventArgs e )
    Invalidate();
    public ImageControl()
    this.DoubleBuffered = true;
    protected override void OnPaint( PaintEventArgs e )
    if( image == null ) return;
    e.Graphics.ResetTransform();
    e.Graphics.Transform = transform;
    ImageAttributes imageAttributes = new ImageAttributes();
    imageAttributes.SetColorMatrix(
    colorMatrix,
    ColorMatrixFlag.Default,
    ColorAdjustType.Bitmap );
    e.Graphics.DrawImage(
    image,
    new Rectangle( 0, 0, image.Width, image.Height),
    0, 0, image.Width, image.Height,
    GraphicsUnit.Pixel,
    imageAttributes );
    You can set a transformation matrix to do the zooming, panning, etc.  And set a color matrix to do simple contrast brightness adjustments.
    // Some example matrices
    float[][] colorMatrixElements = {
    new float[] {2, 0, 0, 0, 0}, // red scaling factor of 2
    new float[] {0, 1, 0, 0, 0}, // green scaling factor of 1
    new float[] {0, 0, 1, 0, 0}, // blue scaling factor of 1
    new float[] {0, 0, 0, 1, 0}, // alpha scaling factor of 1
    new float[] {.2f, .2f, .2f, 0, 1}}; // three translations of 0.2
    ColorMatrix colorMatrix = new ColorMatrix( colorMatrixElements );
    Matrix transform = new Matrix(
    1.5f, 0.0f, // horizontal scale of 1.5, 0
    0.0f, 0.5f, // 0, vertical scale of 0.5
    20.0f, 40.0f, // horizontal offset of 20, vertical offset of 40
    Contrast and brightness are performed together in a single matrix.  Contrast scales the output range and brightness is the offset.
    Zooming is just scale and offset.

  • Image processing with imaq vision with 2 webcams on the same computer

    Hi,
    I'm currently trying to set up 2 usb webcams (logitech quickcam for notebooks pro). I want to be able to have them both run simultaneously and do some image processing with the images that I get from both cameras with labview and imaq vision.
    As of right now, I'm having trouble getting both cameras to run at the same time. Any help would be gladly appreciated. Thanks.

    The USB IMAQ driver will not support running 2 USB cameras at a time (I believe it is a limitation of the DirectShow interface). You could open one camera, acuqire an image, close the reference to that camera and then do the same for the second camera.
    If you need simultaneous acquisition, look at possibly moving to 1394 cameras or analog cameras.

  • Image processing

    Sir,
       I am a beginner in LAB View am using labview 2013.i want to do image recognition using labview.can you please give me some basic programs on image processing and image recognition so that  i can understand atleast image acquisition and processing.i have only lab view software sir.should i download any other software for image processing? if so which software and is it free?please give me the link also sir.please help.
                         thank you.

    Hi,
    you can use LabVIEW to do image recognition. Here is an example of the basic functions to do so. You can also search some examples with the Example Finder.
    This little program looks for an image in a folder. He analyses each picture, and makes a comparision between the searched picture and the pictures in the folder.
    I hope it will help
    Giuliano Franchetto
    Student at the l'Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Etienne, cycle ISMIN (FRANCE)
    Attachments:
    img recognition.zip ‏43 KB

  • Image Processing in Bridge lost PSD originals HELP!

    I am somewhat new to using Adobe Bridge CS4 super frequently, I have been processing batches of images mostly using the 'Image Process' function under tools>photoshop>image processing. I was using it to watermark my photos and size them down. It worked great, did everything I wanted it too and made it's own JPEG folder with all my processed images. HOWEVER I just discovered that when I process them it is somehow is taking the original image and flattening it so it looks like a JPEG even though the file still thinks it's a PSD file. The size is small and all the layers are gone, basically it looks EXACTLY like the JPEG file I'd just made but it's the original file and it's still a PSD (in theory!). I've been racking my brain trying to figure out when I'm doing wrong here! Been all over the internet trying to find a similar situation and I've had no luck. Any thoughts? I'd really appreciate the help. These particular photos are ready to go to print, but I've got my watermark on them and can't exactly remove the layer that isn't there anymore! HELP
    Oona

    Yes I was converting images from PSD to JPEG with the image processing but I was running an action (within the same dialog box) to make the file sizes much smaller for easy upload to the web? Does running an action affect the original as well as the processed images?

  • Image Processing in Java (E-Book) Request

    Can anyone post the links for this e-book
    i think this e-book is helpful.so,iam requesting all of you.
    Image Processing in Java
    by Douglas A. Lyon
    Publisher: Prentice Hall PTR; Bk&CD-Rom edition (March 1, 1999)
    Language: English
    ISBN: 0139745777

    Check ebay, amazon or your local seller for a copy. Or if you want a free copy, write the author (maybe he's a generous fellow), but don't bother people on this forum with posts like this.
    - Travis

Maybe you are looking for