Raw conversion quality

I was under the impression that both Aperture and iPhoto, rather than doing their own raw decoding, shared a system-level raw decoder, and yet there are very noticeable differences between raw files decoded by iPhoto 08 in Leopard and Aperture 1.5.6, differences which didn't exist prior to Leopard and iPhoto 08. Namely, about 5% of my Canon 10D files suffered from what I've come to call "The 5% Rule," which states that 5% of my photos will have prematurely clipped blacks when decoded by the Apple raw converter, but now, in Leopard and iPhoto 08, these same images decode much better in iPhoto even though they still suffer from the prematurely clipped blacks in Aperture. Anybody know what's going on?
For the record, I have clipping levels for adjustments in Aperture set at 0 across the board.
Message was edited by: MarsViolet
Message was edited by: MarsViolet

In that example I actually have all the fine tuning settings disabled except for the boost, but disabling boost doesn't help with the clipped blacks anyway. It just sort of drops the contrast way down. The Aperture adjustments I made are a bit hasty though; I could have finessed them more (cut back on the saturation and whatnot), but the initial conversion is so bad I didn't spend too much time on it.
It seems to me that an Aperture update has to be coming soon. It's kind of embarrassing to have iPhoto yielding better conversions! Not that I have anything against iPhoto, mind you — it's a joy to use for what it's good at — but Aperture needs to get up to speed!
At any rate, I really posted this as more as a point of interest to illustrate that with Leopard raw decoding seems to have split away from being strictly tied to OS updates, which is probably good. It might mean that it'll be easier and quicker for Apple to roll out support for new camera models.
At least I hope so.

Similar Messages

RAW conversion comments

I respect a photographers personal opinions regarding their perceptions of differing quality levels in RAW conversions but in the commercial world these perceived differences between Aperture and say ACR are so minimal they certainly do not qualify as a deal breaker.
In the real world of commercial photography, design and printing, photo images are ultimately used as 8 bit CMYK files or when used for Giclee printing as 8 bit RGB files. These files go through so much retouching and manipulation after the RAW conversion that the esoteric quality differences talked about in these posts are irrelevant.
The proper use of any Camera RAW converter is to balance the image before outputting it as a 16 bit TIFF or PSD for refined manipulation in Photoshop. This would include refined levels adjustments sometimes with layer masks and appropriate sharpening at the final output size.
We typically use the RAW converter to:
1- Pull back highlights that appeared to be blown
2- Open shadow detail that appeared to be plugged
3- Correct color casts and saturation
4- In some cases add special effects such as conversion to rich B&W
Very few serious professionals in either the commercial or fine arts world are going to use the RAW conversion as their final image.
We can argue forever about the pros and cons of this or that RAW conversion quality, but in the real world Aperture's solution, while not absolutely perfect, does an excellent job within a program that enhances real world productivity.
Dual 2ghz G5 Mac OS X (10.4.3)

Tom...
With respect, your logic is hard to accept. You state that in the commercial world, images are typically so heavily manipulated that initially quality of RAW conversion is non-issue.
I am surprised that no one has bothered to challenge this idea. So I'll step up.
If my RAW conversion out of ANY program is going to introduce banding artifacts, 'parquet flooring' patterns, or other noisy type data into solidly colored areas, that will need to be fixed in this manipulation of which you speak. Who could justify having to do this sort of thing when there are perfectly good RAW converters out there that don't add this particular headache to the workflow?
Your message states that "Apertures solution, while not absolutely perfect, does an excellent job within a program that enhances real world productivity."
That statement stands as a contradiction when you consider that extra 'fixing' may need to be done to some images coming straight out of Apertures RAW conversion.
I suspect that you (and others) are not seeing problems because evidence is mounting to support the idea that Apertures RAW conversion works better for some flavors of RAW than others. So, perhaps some people are seeing consisten image trashing, and some not. If this is the case, one could easily understand why some are 'satisfied' and some are positively livid.
However, I digress. I still don't agree at all with the idea that in the commercial world a substandard RAW conversion would make an acceptable starting point for any commercial image, regardless of how much manipulation down the track its going to go through. I can't see any art director being satisfied knowing this was going on in their shop.
"Aperture - sure it mangles your images, but it does a heck of a job keeping track of them!"
Jim

Raw Conversion: Colors not accurate. Correction with profile?

Hi,
When I create JPGs from my Raw files, the results don't look natural. Some colors have more saturation, some less. For example, the colors of the KoMi A series look somehow dirty; the reds of the Maxxum 5D seem to be oversaturated (dark reds are to bright, brown faces look rather pinkish).
This is in comparison to the orignal objects, to the JPGs generated from the KoMi Raw converter and to the in-camera JPGs.
Since Lightroom has tremendous color tuning options (under HSL and Color), I wonder whether a camera-specific profile can make the colors more natural. Has anybody tried for the KoMi cameras? Can anybody share a profile?
I don't have a color checker, so this would be a tough one for me. I tried a bit, but whenever one color seemed right, another color had become worse.
Here is my equipment:
Cameras: Konica Minolta A2, Minolta A1, Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D.
Other: My room has fluorescent tubes of type 950 (5000K, highest quality, Philips Graphica Pro) or of course daylight from outside. My screen is calibrated using ColorPlus hardware. I used a grey card for most of my photos. JPGs viewed with IMatch (color-profile aware).
Regards,
Martin

Hallo Uli,
there are two aspects of the color deviation:
1. Displaying colors in LR
This is what you are addressing in the other thread. I can confirm this behavior, but let's not touch this matter here.
2. Raw conversion
This is what I am talking about in this post. The effect is actually larger than the display deviation.
Regards,
Martin

RAW conversion with Aperture

Has anyone compared the quality of RAW conversion of Aperture vs. Nikon Capture as well as other converters?
I really like the quality of nikon capture and would not want to purchase aperture unless the conversion was at least equivalent.
Thanks for any input.
mark
G4 17" Laptop Mac OS X (10.4.3)

I've compared Aperture's conversion side by side with Adobe Camera Raw's. My method was to do some conversions with Camera Raw and save the result along with the RAW file. Then, in the Apple Store, I performed the conversions using Aperture.
The results from Aperture are not good. They look okay at reduced size, but if you look more closely, the de-mosaicing Aperture performs is quite bad. On some images it is only "somewhat" worse than Camera Raw; on others it is so bad as to be unusable. Shadow detail suffers the most, but highlights are not immune. Some images showed color fringing that was not present in the Camera Raw conversion, even with all chromatic aberration adjustments set to zero in Camera Raw.
I ignored differences in color and tonal rendering because I did not have enough time with Aperture to learn to get the best results out of it in terms of color. It takes a while to figure out how to get good color out of a RAW converter.
In no case was Aperture as good as Adobe Camera Raw in terms of image quality. The difference was immediately obvious at 100% magnification.
I would not use Aperture for RAW conversion.
EDIT: I forgot to mention, in case it matters, my camera is a Nikon D2X.

Contact Sheets / Proofing and useful Aperture RAW Conversion

All,
I wanted to appeal to all of you pro photographers out there to share about how you handle the proofing stage (contact sheets) with your clients. I'm curious about how you all make this process as efficient as possible.
Ok, say you have taken 1000 pictures for a wedding or some other event (forget the accuracy of that number, its just a round number for discussion sake). You need to present your photos to your client, but you need to present a subset of the 1000 photos for a few reasons:
1) Not all photos you are going to take are going to be great. I've heard a general quote by some pro photographers that their "keeper ratios" (the percentage of pics that are really good from a shoot) run around 10%-20%. Fair enough, I don't want to debate this percentage, but it gives us a target number of 100 photos to present to a client from a 1000 picture shoot.
2) Your client is probably not going to be happy if they have to sift through 1000 photos. I recently had a friend who paid several thousand dollars for a wedding photographer who sent them 1000 photos to choose from. They weren't particularly happy with this, and told the guy there was just too many to choose from. Personally, I felt that this was putting part of the photographer's responsibility on the client, but whatever.
Ok...so for the sake of the example here, we have to get 1000 photos down to 100 photos, so the client can choose what 50 (for example) they want to purchase and have printed, put in their photo book, slide presentation, etc.
Sorry for the long intro, but here is the issue at hand: we want to work quickly for the client, and get them their 100 photos as soon as possible. We also want to put our best foot forward, and give them high-quality photos. But at the same time, we want to work efficiently, and if possible not spend time doing final retouching on photos that the customer doesn't want, but rather focus this time directly on the photos the customer does want.
I have two questions from this which pertain to Aperture's RAW conversion and workflow:
1) Do you do any significant adjustments on photos for the contact sheets you present to clients (the 100 photos now)? Is it just a quick exposure adjustment, or are you retouching all 100?
2) Despite Aperture's RAW conversion problems and other adjustment glitches, is it sufficient quality in your opinion for a contact sheet?
My purpose in asking these questions is that perhaps the Aperture RAW conversion issue can be mitigated if we can get to the point of customer contact and review using Aperture-only conversion and adjustment tools, and then isolate photoshop use for only the final, significant edits. The problems with Aperture's RAW conversion are well-documented, but the question is, could it still be sufficient for small-scale proofs, understanding that for large-scale, high-res images, it won't be suffcient.
Your opinons are valued!
Brad
Powerbook G4-1.33GHz-17" / Powermac G4-1.4GHz Mac OS X (10.4.2) PB: 1GB RAM, Radeon 9600-64MB / PM: 1.25GB RAM, Radeon 9000Pro-128MB

">-DELETE project from Aperture because I can't use the app for the delivery
of finals:
Forgive me if I've forgotten the detail you may have posted elsewhere about this. I have seen you mention this several times, but I am really interested in the specifics behind the problems you have encountered. I have some needs in finishing that are beyond just regurgitating a photo. I'll be basically augmenting my photo with text, borders, special effects, etc. for more professional presentation, and the ability to market a photo in different ways. This is one reason I cannot discard Photoshop from my workflow. Anyway, let's assume for a moment I'm able to do all my editing in Photoshop, and those PSD files are sitting within Aperture. From there, what problems am I going to encounter? I'm tapping your brain here, as the time I have spent in Aperture has been primarily oriented toward everything prior to the finishing stage. "
Hi Brad,
If I've imported images into Aperture that have previously been worked over in Photoshop, none of the layers I may have created in those files will be available to me from within Aperture. This does not break but severely sprains the functionality of Photoshop. I'm keeping the images around because I think I or my clients will need them later, so what might I do with them?:
1) If I'd like to do more work on them I either have to abandon access to the previously created layers and their magic, or export the file from Aperture, work on it outside, import it back into Aperture. Every time I want to work with those layers I have to do the same dance.
2) If I'd like to send jpg or tif versions of those files anywhere I can choose to use the tools within Aperture or Photoshop to do so. Aperture's tools for these conversions are simply not of professional utility: no compressed tifs, no layered tif support, no quality choices for jpgs and no jpg previews. And in either case, using Aperture or Photoshop, the conversions are created OUTSIDE of Aperture and not managed by it.
3) When I decide to archive my older projects I'm faced with the incredible limitation that Aperture will not allow me any remote search of any archive that is not "live" within Aperture. Not even Spotlight will search Aperture libraries!!!!!
So moving already created projects into Aperture has absolutely no advantages and a number of problems, any one of which might be a deal-killer by itself.
If I'd like to use Aperture to manage work that I create going forward I've got those limitations already listed above, but I CAN access layers in PSD that are created from within Aperture. I cannot make layered duplicates of those files in order to work on versions of those images so once again the Photoshop workflow is hobbled.
All of this makes it a bad idea for my projects to make anything but a brief trip in and out of Aperture for sorting/proofing.
Regards,
fp

Raw conversion color differences

Yes, I know that Adobe had to guess at how raw files are encoded (I shoot Nikon)a and that perfect color conversion should not be expected but...
I started with Capture NX2 and while I loved the quality of pictures I could get from it, it was very slow and cumbersome, and publishing photos was not possible.
I switched to LR3 and found the photo management (publishing, collections, etc) to be marvelous (maybe other products have it as well, but I found my happy place. However, I noticed that even with a calibrated monitor the colors were not right. Below are two pictures labeled cnx2 and LR3. The CNX2 version was processed to include "bluing" the sky. Not much else was done. The LR3 version (done as a training aid until this was found) is unprocessed except for an X-rite color checker profile applied (more on this later). Notice how the CNX2 red has turned pink or magenta in the LR3 version. To try and fix the pink, I bought an X-Rite color checker and installed their plugin for creating profiles. Made no significant difference. This is really bothering me. Sure with some skills I haven't yet acquired I may be able to target the red and fix it, but to do it correctly I'd need to know what It's supposed to look like, and I had hoped to no longer require the use of CNX2 so that wouldn't be the case. I'm considering going back to CNX2 for raw conversions and maybe capture sharpening (I'm more comfortable with CNX2 capture sharpening numbers than I am with LR3).
CNX2
LR3/ACR 6.x
Thoughts? Suggestions?

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}
Jeff Schewe wrote:
Really, people tend to give Nikon and Canon far too much credit...in fact, they just barely got this stuff to work. I will say the cameras and sensors are pretty darn impressive...their image processing knowledge, not so much.
Canon does seem to know how to make pleasing images and get the most out of their data.
Some examples: Canon does a better job, in some ways, at rescuing partial overexposure (compare sunset images). And they know how to put a raw converter in a piece of silicon that runs in a tiny fraction of a second.
But these things aren't really important... The real issue is even simpler:
If all you did was make the default profile for each camera produce the same colors the cameras themselves produce, while still providing all the same configurability and features, you'd cease to get complaints about colors being "off".
Whether you think the cameras produce "good" color or the camera company engineers know anything about color is irrelevant.
No one would be harmed by this, but you'd stop confusing customers who expect one thing and see another.
-Noel

Will updates fix RAW conversion?

Can anyone tell me if updates for Aperture will fix some of what is so obviously lacking? In particlar the RAW conversions. I also hear somefolks suggesting to wait for later versions. Does that mean that Version 2 will be a whole different Disc that I would have to buy AGAIN or are they reffering to the Updates? Thanks to anyone for your time and response. Cheers to the Holidays!

WHY would Apple bury RAW conversion tools in the OS?
A really, really good reason is that it makes applications easier to write for OS X.
If I want to write software that works with RAW files, on other systems I'd probably have to find some library to help me process them and then do all the other work.
With OS X I can just use the built in conversion and probably get a higher level of conversion quality than anything I could do myself.
Sure right now some of the conversions are not as good as what ACR and C1 offer. But think of the amount of use and review C1 and ACR have had by now! Do you honestly think ACR conversions are no better now than they were at v1.0?
Aperture if nothing else is a great way to get pros looking at the quality of the OS X conversions and forcing improvement. In the end we will see really good conversions for most cameras and at that point every app will be able to make use of them, not just Aperture.
I am currently using the latest ACR beta, would it be
possible to use a beta raw converter from Apple?
Nooooo!
Actually yes, they could simply provide an installer to give you newer RAW adjustments you could try out. Nothing about being in the OS prevents betas, or even releases off-cycle as they have said (and I said earlier) they can package conversion improvements both with OS updates and with Aperture updates. They could include them with iPhoto updates or all by themselves if they wished!

I have an A77 and see that DxO RAW conversions look different

Several RAW conversion comparisons on the web amongst A77 users are pointing to markedly better conversions and noise handling currently within new DxO 7 eg. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1037&thread=39970661
I know that Sony's RAW have historically taken a while to arrive at optimal conversions from previous experinece with my A350. When Lightroom 3 came along it was like getting new cameras for most Sony Alpha users with from RAW performance at last matching Nikon from effectively the same sensors.
Can you let me know the likely time lag till ACR and Lightroom will have an update to this initial default to really match the DxO performance. Otherwise, to be honest, despite being a Lightroom user since the original Beta stages and a passionate supporter and advocate, I may have to consider jumping ship. Working exclusively in RAW I do need to be using the very best conversions possible to make the best out of my investment in my camera equipment.
I don't know if this lag with ARW conversions is because Sony don't co-operate with Adobe early enough or whether because Sony is only number three in DSLR share it gets less priority within Adobe than Canon and Nikon, but some timeline on a revised version of Lightroom to address this for the new Sony Alphas would be great.
Many thanks from a long time advocate who really hopes I can stick with Lightroom,
Cheers,
Paul

Hi Hal,
Many thanks...I’ll give it a try. Not trying to cause trouble as I genuinely am a fan of LR, but if they always lag on getting to grips with Sony RAWs it’s a major drawback for Sony users.
Cheers,
Paul

Lightroom vs. Photoshop Raw conversion

I have noticed that the Lightroom RAW conversion looks about 1/3 to 1/2 stop brighter compared to Photoshop on the same image with the same settings (I'm using LR 2.4 and Photoshop CS4). Anybody else notice this or have any thoughts? I'm assuming they use the same RAW conversion engine.

Thanks for the response. Well, when I export from LR to a JPEG and do the same from Photoshop (viewing them in photoshop), I get two slightly different toned images (I mistakenly said the LR images are brighter...they're actually darker). Viewing them this way should remove any monitor discrepencies (I'm working on a calibrated Lacie 724 monitor with 120% Adobe 1998 gamut so that should not be an issue).

5D Mark II raw image quality

There's been a post by A Museman (earlier this year) on "5D Mark II raw image quality" that attempts to discuss the differences and problems with Aperture with flat / poor quality raw photo's as compared to sharper, clearer, more saturated pictures processed in Digital Photo Professional.
That thread "seems" to have faded in discussion. I am still having problems with Aperture and raw photo quality from my Canon 5D Mark II camera.
Can someone shed some light on this subject, in that has the problem been been identified, validate, resolved or does the problem still exist (as it does for me).
This problem is causing me a lot of frustration since I want to use Aperture because of its organization and potential processing capability. Although I get superior results with DPP, it does cause a lot of file storage requirements by having large raw and jpeg files for the same picture (in essence it doubles the file storage requirements).

On my end there are no issues. I get absolutely beautiful portrait renderings out of aperture and my 5d2 - the dynamic range is amazing with this combo. I can often adjust exposure 3+ stops if needed before getting into too much noise.
The best output I've ever had - completely smokes the ACR rendering of skin tones.
Aperture 2 doesn't apply the "Picture Style" preset to the raw decode like DPP does. This makes raw images look flat in comparison to the camera rendered jpeg - shoot in "faithful" mode and you will have a pretty much exact match.
So My quick recipe to match the default setting is adding a little vibrancy, definition, and contrast. FWIW I would turn off the auto lighting optimizer, and the highlight tone priority if using aperture.

Panasonic Lumex DMC-LX1 raw conversion for Aperture doesn't work.

I've seen many people having raw conversion problems. Direct import of Lumex raw files to Aperture does not work.
Adobe DNG conversion of raw to dng does not work.
I'm running on Photoshop CS.
Perhaps my DNG conversion settings aren't right? Tell me what they should be.
Do I have to go as far as changing the raw.plist or whatever it's called.
Would CS2 with the Raw conversion Plug-in work instead?
Remember that..."If all the woman lived across the sea, what a great swimmer Yellowman would be"!
2.0 Duelly G5 4gigs ram. 23" Flat Cinema Mac OS X (10.4.6)

Joe,
good to see that you are reading these posts. I am sure that many users whose cameras' raw files are currently not supported by Aperture would love to help out in any way they can.
However, as we are living in a converging world, why doesn't Apple talk with Adobe and share some of the information used for RAW conversion? I'm thinking dcraw which (according to a note in its source code*) is using data provided by Adobe... and that same data is also contained in the Raw.plist.
Thus, if Adobe knows something and shares it with dcraw, and Apple uses some of the dcraw code (at least the m2 matrices found in Raw.plist are equal to the dcraw ones), why can't you guys all share the same information, and thus speed up RAW support for all cameras?
Just a thought.
Kindest regards,
Karl
* This is the bit:
Thanks to Adobe for providing these excellent CAM -> XYZ matrices!
void CLASS adobe_coeff (char *make, char *model)
powerbook G4 17 1.33 GHz Mac OS X (10.4.6)

"Unable to save the raw conversion settings. There was a write permission error."

I just built a new workstation for processing photos using PS CS5. I use external drives to store my images as I find it easier for backing up as well as for when I want use my laptop for sorting, etc.. I copied over all my old "Collection" files, and of course, had to "fix" them once on the new machine. Once pointed in the right direction, the collections all fill out correctly.
When I go to process a collection though, I encounter an odd problem I can't seem to sort out. I can delete files, rename files, copy/paste to the external drives, etc.. What I can't seem to do is add Labels, Ratings, or modify RAW settings. I mean, I can use ACR to make adjustments, I just can't seem to save them.
The system just ignores label, rating commands completely. When I try to save an ACR adjustment I get this error. "Unable to save the raw conversion settings. There was a write permission error."
The files are NOT write protected. I'm set up as the owner of my workstation, with complete control of the system. I can't seem to find any useful information about this error because the "write permission error" seems to only be happening on installs, so that's all I can find help for.
My system:
Intel Core i7 970@ 3.20GHZ
24.0 GB RAM
64-bit OS - Windows 7 Pro
DX58S02 Motherboard
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580

Thanks for replying. I've been going crazy trying to fix this.
To answer your first question; I use sidecar XMP files. If everything from my archive was shot in RAW I'd try converting to DNG and see if embedding the changes directly in a file worked. Unfortunately, a lot of my old stuff was shot in JPG, so sidecars seems to be the best choice.
When I add labels, ratings, as well as change RAW settings on files I place on my workstations HD everything works. It's only when I try to do these things with the same files on removable drives that I run into trouble. The drives I use are Transcend 640GB StoreJet 25ms connected via USB.
I don't think it's a UAC problem. At least, to my understanding, doesn't that control how your machine alerts you to program changes? I looked into how to change ownership, and did so, but that didn't work. Here's a link to what I mean: http://www.addictivetips.com/windows-tips/windows-7-access-denied-permission-ownership/
I'm stumped. I also hate the idea that I'll have to go through various folders to find images from already created collections, copy them to a new folder on my HD and then work on them. Then I'll have to put them all back... ugghhhh

Exported Raw Conversion Image Resolution and Assigning a Color Profile, etc

In Aperture 1.1, although I set the exported Raw conversion image resolution to 300 dpi in the preferences, it continues to come out at 72 dpi which is something of an inconvenience. Also, is it possible to assign a color profile to the "exported version" so that it is congruent to my PS CS2 color workspace (if that is what its called). Is this program capable of carrying out a conversion as a background operation? Finally, can the layout windows be configured so that they remember how they have been used in the past? Thanks.

Iatrogenic huh! Cool!
Anyway, I'm not real clear on what it is you are trying to accomplish. Despite your obvious vocabulary skills, there seems to be some disconnect relative to what you are trying to accomplish. You are right that "exporting a version" in Aperture is roughly equivalent to what happens in ACR when you "Open" a RAW image into Photoshop. In both cases you have, hopefully, already done the adjusting of parameters you want prior to "exporting", or "opening". When you "open" or "export" you wind up with an "image" composed of pixels, whereas in the RAW adjustment phase you are just working with a temporary thumbnail and a set of mathematical instructions. Big difference, I suppose is that when you "open" and image from ACR into CS2, the resulting image is truly just pixels and has not had a "file type" applied to the file yet, until you "save" it, while in Aperture, if you "export" a file to CS2, or to the desktop, you end up with the file type already applied. Presuming you "export" a 16 bit TIFF or PSD, there is no operational difference.
I could be wrong, but with the new Bayer Demosaicing algorithms in Aperture 1.1, and the Camera RAW adjustments, you should be able to come up with an adjusted image that is VERY close if not identical to one done in ACR, with the possible exception of lens abberation adjustment. I was very critical of the RAW adjustments in 1.0.1, but I am very happy with the capabilites in 1.1. That said, I think there is still some room for improvement in user friendliness of some of the adjustments such as Levels.

Numeric or value error: hex to raw conversion error , pls help

I am having problem with a sproc which accepts a Raw parameter.
I have a table called Profile:
CREATE TABLE PROFILES
PROFILEID INTEGER NOT NULL,
USERID INTEGER NOT NULL,
PROFILE RAW(255)
and a sproc named addprofile
CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE addprofile
profile IN RAW,
userName IN VARCHAR2
AS
userId INT;
BEGIN
GetUserIdByName( userName, userId);
INSERT INTO Profiles
( ProfileID,userId , profile )
VALUES ( Profiles_ProfileID_SEQ.NEXTVAL,AddProfile.userId ,
AddProfile.profile );
END;
I am calling the Ent Library's Insert profile method which is part of DbProfileProvider.cs (Security App block). It is trying to persist a serialized profile object into the database.
private void InsertProfile(string userName, byte[] serializedProfile,
Data.Database securityDb, IDbTransaction transaction)
DBCommandWrapper cmd = securityDb.GetStoredProcCommandWrapper
(SPAddProfile);
cmd.AddInParameter("userName", DbType.String, userName);
cmd.AddInParameter("profile", DbType.Binary, serializedProfile);
securityDb.ExecuteNonQuery(cmd, transaction);
I get the following error:
Any suggestion on what needs to be changed to get this working? thanks!
Exception Details: Oracle.DataAccess.Client.OracleException: ORA-06502: PL/SQL: numeric or value error: hex to raw conversion error ORA-06512: at line 1
Stack trace:
[OracleException: ORA-06502: PL/SQL: numeric or value error: hex to raw conversion error
ORA-06512: at line 1]
Oracle.DataAccess.Client.OracleException.HandleErrorHelper(Int32 errCode, OracleConnection conn, IntPtr opsErrCtx, OpoSqlValCtx* pOpoSqlValCtx, Object src, String procedure)
Oracle.DataAccess.Client.OracleException.HandleError(Int32 errCode, OracleConnection conn, String procedure, IntPtr opsErrCtx, OpoSqlValCtx* pOpoSqlValCtx, Object src)
Oracle.DataAccess.Client.OracleCommand.ExecuteNonQuery()
Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Data.Database.DoExecuteNonQuery(DBCommandWrapper command)
Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Data.Database.ExecuteNonQuery(DBCommandWrapper command, IDbTransaction transaction)
Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Security.Database.DbProfileProvider.InsertProfile(String userName, Byte[] serializedProfile, Database securityDb, IDbTransaction transaction)
Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Security.Database.DbProfileProvider.SetProfile(IIdentity identity, Object profile)
[InvalidOperationException: Error saving the profile for the following user 'test'.]
Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Security.Database.DbProfileProvider.SetProfile(IIdentity identity, Object profile)
EntLibSecuritySample.DFO.Security.SecurityHelper.SetUserProfile(IIdentity identity, Object Profile) in C:\DFO\Sample\Security\EntLibSecuritySample\SecurityHelper.vb:285
[ApplicationException: An error has occurred saving profile object to Datastore. See stack trace for further information]
EntLibSecuritySample.DFO.Security.SecurityHelper.SetUserProfile(IIdentity identity, Object Profile) in C:\DFO\Sample\Security\EntLibSecuritySample\SecurityHelper.vb:287
EntLibSecuritySample.ProfilePage.cmdSaveProfile_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e) in C:\DFO\Sample\Security\EntLibSecuritySample\profile.aspx.vb:59
System.Web.UI.WebControls.Button.OnClick(EventArgs e)
System.Web.UI.WebControls.Button.System.Web.UI.IPostBackEventHandler.RaisePostBackEvent(String eventArgument)
System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(IPostBackEventHandler sourceControl, String eventArgument)
System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(NameValueCollection postData)
System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain() +1292

Harsh,
I am not a user of the Enterprise Library so I can not speak to the specifics of that. However, here is a short sample that is based on the information you've provided. Perhaps it will be useful.
Database:
create table profiles
profileid integer not null,
userid    integer not null,
profile   raw(255)
create or replace procedure addprofile
p_profileid in integer,
p_userid    in integer,
p_profile   in raw
as
begin
insert into
    profiles (profileid, userid, profile)
    values (p_profileid, p_userid, p_profile);
end;
/C# code:
using System;
using System.Data;
using System.Text;
using Oracle.DataAccess.Client;
using Oracle.DataAccess.Types;
namespace HarshTest
/// <summary>
/// Summary description for Class1.
/// </summary>
class Class1
    /// <summary>
    /// The main entry point for the application.
    /// </summary>
    [STAThread]
    static void Main(string[] args)
      // connect to local db using o/s authentication
      OracleConnection con = new OracleConnection("User ID=/; Pooling=False");
      con.Open();
      // create command object and set properties
      OracleCommand cmd = new OracleCommand();
      cmd.Connection = con;
      cmd.CommandText = "ADDPROFILE";
      cmd.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure;
      // parameter object for profileid
      OracleParameter p_profileid = new OracleParameter();
      p_profileid.OracleDbType = OracleDbType.Int32;
      p_profileid.Value = 1;
      p_profileid.Direction = ParameterDirection.Input;
      // parameter object for userid
      OracleParameter p_userid = new OracleParameter();
      p_userid.OracleDbType = OracleDbType.Int32;
      p_userid.Value = 1;
      p_userid.Direction = ParameterDirection.Input;
      // create a byte array for the raw value
      ASCIIEncoding encoder = new ASCIIEncoding();
      byte[] byteArray = encoder.GetBytes("TestProfile");
      // parameter object for profile
      OracleParameter p_profile = new OracleParameter();
      p_profile.OracleDbType = OracleDbType.Raw;
      p_profile.Value = byteArray;
      p_profile.Direction = ParameterDirection.Input;
      // add parameters to collection
      cmd.Parameters.Add(p_profileid);
      cmd.Parameters.Add(p_userid);
      cmd.Parameters.Add(p_profile);
      // execute the stored procedure
      try
        cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();
      catch (OracleException ex)
        Console.WriteLine(ex.Message);
      // clean up objects
      p_profile.Dispose();
      p_userid.Dispose();
      p_profileid.Dispose();
      cmd.Dispose();
      con.Dispose();
}Maybe the part about creating the byte array is what you are missing...
- Mark

ORA-22835: Buffer too small for CLOB to CHAR or BLOB to RAW conversion

Hi all,
the following query select to_char(nvl(round(pc.target_cost*xx_primavera.geteurtolvrate,2),amount),'FM999G999G999G999G990D00') detail_amount,
nvl(ct.cost_type, description) detail_description,
tm_desc.memo_id,
primavera_prj_name detail_prj_name,
hp.party_number detail_party_number,
xpid.interface_line_attribute1,
utl_i18n.unescape_reference(replace(regexp_replace(utl_raw.cast_to_varchar2(tm_desc.task_memo), '<[^>]*>'), chr(13)||chr(10))) document_description,
REPLACE(regexp_replace(utl_raw.cast_to_varchar2(tm_id.task_memo), '<[^>]*>'), chr(13)||chr(10)) prim_memo_client_id
from XX_PRIMAVERA_INVOICES_DETAIL xpid
join admuser.xx_ar_hz_parties xahp on xahp.orig_system_bill_customer_id = xpid.orig_system_bill_customer_id
join hz_parties hp on hp.party_id = xahp.party_id
left join admuser.projcost pc on pc.proj_id = xpid.primavera_prj_id and pc.cost_type_id != 29 and xpid.service_code = 8 and pc.task_id = xx_primavera.getTaskId(xpid.primavera_prj_id,'A1020', 'Изготвяне на оферта') and delete_session_id is null
left join admuser.costtype ct on ct.cost_type_id = pc.cost_type_id
left join admuser.taskmemo tm_id on tm_id.proj_id = xpid.primavera_prj_id and tm_id.memo_type_id = 53 and tm_id.task_id = xx_primavera.getTaskId(xpid.primavera_prj_id,'A1020', 'Изготвяне на оферта')
left join admuser.taskmemo tm_desc on tm_desc.proj_id = xpid.primavera_prj_id and tm_desc.memo_type_id = 55 and tm_desc.task_id = xx_primavera.getTaskId(xpid.primavera_prj_id,'A1020', 'Изготвяне на оферта')
where amount != 0
and xpid.interface_line_attribute1 = :ra_ctp_attribute1
ORDER BY xpid.primavera_prj_name, xpid.description;returns error:
ORA-22835: Buffer too small for CLOB to CHAR or BLOB to RAW conversion (actual: 2371, maximum: 2000) I found that the error occurs in the row : utl_i18n.unescape_reference(replace(regexp_replace(utl_raw.cast_to_varchar2(tm_desc.task_memo), '<[^>]*>'), chr(13)||chr(10))) document_description,and tried to change it to: utl_i18n.unescape_reference(replace(regexp_replace(utl_raw.cast_to_varchar2(dbms_lob.substr(tm_desc.task_memo,1,2000)), '<[^>]*>'), chr(13)||chr(10))) document_description,....but it returns not value for that field... am i using dbms_lob.substr at the wrong place? The column 'tm_desc.task_memo' is BLOB type.
Any ideas how to cheat it ?
Version: Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.1.0.7.0 - Production
PL/SQL Release 11.1.0.7.0 - Production
"CORE     11.1.0.7.0     Production"
TNS for Linux: Version 11.1.0.7.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 11.1.0.7.0 - ProductionThanks in advance,
Bahchevanov.

Your second example has the parameters reversed. The amount (length) comes first and then the offset:
DBMS_LOB.SUBSTR (
   lob_loc     IN    BLOB,
   amount      IN    INTEGER := 32767,
   offset      IN    INTEGER := 1)
RETURN RAW;
DBMS_LOB.SUBSTR (
   lob_loc     IN    CLOB   CHARACTER SET ANY_CS,
   amount      IN    INTEGER := 32767,
   offset      IN    INTEGER := 1)
RETURN VARCHAR2 CHARACTER SET lob_loc%CHARSET;
DBMS_LOB.SUBSTR (
   file_loc     IN    BFILE,
   amount      IN    INTEGER := 32767,
   offset      IN    INTEGER := 1)
RETURN RAW;Also, remember that # of bytes is not necessarily the same as the # of characters depending on your character set. So 2000 bytes might become 4000 characters. And you have to make sure the BLOB is actually character data and not arbitrary binary data.
Post the results of reversing the parameters and using a smaller chunk size.

Raw conversion quality

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for