CHDK & Canon SD1000

Discussion in 'Canon' started by Pioneer42, Feb 19, 2009.

  1. Pioneer42

    Pioneer42 Guest

    Has anyone here tried the CHDK project's firmware with a Canon SD1000?
    Are there any issues I should know about before I try it? I am looking
    for some tips on this process because I don't want to brick my camera.
     
    Pioneer42, Feb 19, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Pioneer42

    Irwell Guest

    You can't hurt your SD1000 by using CHDK, go to the Wikipedia site
    and study it all, I no longer have the SD1000, but I did load the CHDK
    and it added many additional functions to the camera.
     
    Irwell, Feb 19, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Pioneer42

    SneakyP Guest

    AFAIKT there isn't any flash memory that could crud up your camera program.
    The program for CHDK preloads from the memory on the card and is not a
    resident flash memory. To get back the camera you had from the beginning,
    just avoid loading that program card into your camera. Bricking involves
    flashing your memory on the unit into accepting a new program that may or
    may not freeze your process up. As I understand it, you'd do well to avoid
    that unfortunate situation in routers/firewalls, where that terminology
    applies too well. Cameras...they don't have flash memory to mess around
    with, do they??? I've been tinkering with CHDK and a Cannon SD1000 for a
    year now and have had favorable results. One can take the raw data and
    process it the way you want it to look, without having to worry about
    overexposed or underexposed shots as much. I've never had a problem of
    irreversible bricking on a camera.

    --
    SneakyP
    To reply: newsgroup only, what's posted in ng stays in ng.

    Some choose to swim in the potty bowl of nan-ae rather than flush it
    down :0)
     
    SneakyP, Feb 20, 2009
    #3
  4. Pioneer42

    ASAAR Guest

    Sure they do. If Canon needs to fix problems or add features, you
    download a firmware update, and follow Canon's procedure which
    starts by copying the firmware to a memory card. So it's
    theoretically possible that some version of CHDK could wait for a
    future date or some other trigger and start baking bricks. :)

    Here's Canon's web site for digital camera firmware updates,
    including a number of Powershots, such as the G1, G2, G3, G10, SD800
    IS, SD430, IXUS 700, S50 and more.

    http://web.canon.jp/imaging/BeBit-e.html
     
    ASAAR, Feb 20, 2009
    #4
  5. Pioneer42

    Pioneer42 Guest


    Just out of curiosity, what were your camera settings, and what type of
    post-processing did you use? One of my main interests in CHDK is for
    helping with astrophotography.
     
    Pioneer42, Feb 20, 2009
    #5
  6. Pioneer42

    Pioneer42 Guest

    Concerning the RAW data produced by CHDK, I haven't been able to find a
    suitable program to edit them with. Paint Shop Pro Photo XII won't open
    them, Windows Live Photo Gallery won't open them (even with Canon's WIC
    codec installed), GIMP won't open, and I don't own Photoshop. The only
    thing that will open them is Picasa. What format is the raw data stored
    in, and what codecs/programs do I need to access them?
     
    Pioneer42, Feb 20, 2009
    #6
  7. Pioneer42

    jimbok Guest

    Most current versions of CHDK give you the option to save the RAW
    files in DNG format (Adobe Digital Negative). DNG can be opened in
    numerous programs including Irfanview and XnView.

    Another conversion option is to use a program such as "DNG4ps2" which
    will convert Powershot RAW files to DNG.

    http://code.google.com/p/dng4ps2/

    A third option is to use a program such as RawTherapee, which can work
    directly with Powershot RAW files.

    http://www.rawtherapee.com/

    All are freeware
     
    jimbok, Feb 20, 2009
    #7
  8. Pioneer42

    Justin C Guest

    However, the source code of CHDK is available. There are *many* eyes
    reading and reviewing it. Should anything virus-like were in there it
    would be seen, removed, and the offending coder kick/banned from the
    project. It's a project by photographers for their own benefit, it's not
    going to "bake bricks".

    The benefit of open source is that anyone can read the code and, where
    they see enhancement potential, contribute and improve it. That your
    average Joe (or Justin) doesn't understand what's in there isn't a
    problem because there are enough code experts out there who want to make
    this stuff work for their benefit too (contrary to popular belief code
    geeks often have other hobbies!).

    Justin.
     
    Justin C, Feb 20, 2009
    #8
  9. Pioneer42

    ASAAR Guest

    You misunderstand. You're right that any mal-ware features added
    would quickly be discovered, but that's by those that are interested
    in downloading source, compiling and comparing with binaries. The
    vast majority only download binaries, and many of these probably
    don't restrict their downloads to safe, approved sites. I'm not
    suggesting that any "virus-like" version of CHDK would be produced
    by coders associated with the projects you're referring to.
    Distributing source is an amazingly good concept, but it also
    entails some minor risk. I downloaded CHDK several years ago for
    one of my Powershots and liked the digital voltage display, but for
    whatever reason stopped using it. I also don't recall where it was
    downloaded from. It's almost certainly was a safe, virus-free
    binary, but the point is that if it wasn't, nobody would know if it
    wasn't safe if it was downloaded from some irresponsible website
    that didn't also provide matching source code. If that was the
    case, it could have been designed with a multi-year delay before
    going rogue.

    One of those hobbies might have something to do with cameras, I
    believe. :) Other geeks enjoy trolling newsgroups as anti-DSLR sock
    puppets that push both CHDK and Photoline 32. Not referring to you,
    btw. It's these (this?) unstable CHDK fanatics that make caution
    something to consider, justin case. :) CHDK would probably be more
    popular if one tenth of the effort put into its coding was put into
    its interface and documentation. From what I saw several years ago,
    it's a geek's present to other geeks. It would be nice if that's no
    longer the case.
     
    ASAAR, Feb 20, 2009
    #9
  10. Pioneer42

    ASAAR Guest

    "unstable CHDK fanatics". See above. Too bad about that "ONLY
    person" you mentioned that evidently suffered from burnout. You
    should ha . . . He should have sought help (in more ways than one).
    Writing good documentation can be as difficult as writing good code,
    and beta testing improves both products. It's certainly made more
    difficult when megalomania intrudes.
     
    ASAAR, Feb 21, 2009
    #10
  11. Pioneer42

    Robert Coe Guest

    : On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 06:11:03 GMT, SneakyP wrote:
    : > AFAIKT there isn't any flash memory that could crud up your camera
    : > program. The program for CHDK preloads from the memory on the card and
    : > is not a resident flash memory. To get back the camera you had from
    : > the beginning, just avoid loading that program card into your camera.
    : > Bricking involves flashing your memory on the unit into accepting a new
    : > program that may or may not freeze your process up. As I understand it,
    : > you'd do well to avoid that unfortunate situation in routers/firewalls,
    : > where that terminology applies too well. Cameras...they don't have
    : > flash memory to mess around with, do they???
    :
    : Sure they do. If Canon needs to fix problems or add features, you
    : download a firmware update, and follow Canon's procedure which
    : starts by copying the firmware to a memory card. So it's
    : theoretically possible that some version of CHDK could wait for a
    : future date or some other trigger and start baking bricks. :)

    The assumption implicit in that warning is that software running on an SD card
    can hijack the camera's firmware upgrade procedure. I suppose that's possible
    (almost anything is), but it would represent quite a grievous oversight on
    Canon's part. Even if that flaw exists in some earlier Canons, one would
    certainly hope that they'd have fixed it in more recent models.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 21, 2009
    #11
  12. Pioneer42

    Robert Coe Guest

    :
    : >evidently suffered from burnout
    :
    : You read that wrong, as usual, as how all pathetic trolls misread thing so
    : they can use everyone's posts for more attention-getting methods. Trolls
    : are so desperate.
    :
    : Learn to read. It said nothing about "suffered from burnout". But it was
    : all about suffering from "burnouts", people just like you.
    :
    : Isn't it nice to know that because of you and all the other trolls just
    : like you, that the only people capable of helping are no longer helping.
    :
    : Your loss and the loss of everyone ... just because you were born.
    :
    : Talk to all your relatives about birth-control, sterilization, and abortion
    : methods. Send them links on the "coat-hanger" method if nothing else.
    : Someone sorely needs to do something about their lack of abortion
    : information in your whole genetic line.
    :
    : You are, unfortunately, "living" proof of that.

    This person appears to be insane. Is that what ASAAR meant by "burnout"?

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 21, 2009
    #12
  13. Pioneer42

    ASAAR Guest

    No, I don't think that software could easily hijack the upgrade.
    I don't know Canon's procedure because unlike other companies it
    didn't show it online and it's included with the download which
    requires a serial number. All of the other upgrade procedures I've
    used for cameras from other manufacturers have you copy the upgrade
    binary file to a freshly formatted memory card, or run a
    manufacturer's executable while the camera is linked to the computer
    via USB. Even a malevolent binary on an SD card would be harmless
    unless the user intentionally started the camera in a non-obvious
    manner, so unless that user was the one that placed the binary on
    the card, it would remain dormant and harmless. I assume that
    Canon's procedure is reasonably secure, much more so than if the
    user runs any of MS's versions of Outlook. :)
     
    ASAAR, Feb 21, 2009
    #13
  14. Pioneer42

    Mark Thomas Guest

    This childish troll is "Keoeeit", found on other forums and in the past
    as X-Man, Baumbadier, 'the anti-dslr-troll', and as both keoeeit and
    Dave Ingols on dpreview. It is *easy* to verify this.

    He also posts under a myriad of names, Carl Ashley being the latest, as
    he is too gutless to be identified and thinks people will believe he has
    support, the only support being from his sockpuppets..

    He is an embarrassment to the CHDK development community, who would now
    like to disown him for the damage he does to the promotion of what is
    actually quite a good product. But because of it's association with
    Keoeeit, it will never be a successful as it could have been.
     
    Mark Thomas, Feb 22, 2009
    #14
  15. Pot, Kettle....
     
    John McWilliams, Feb 23, 2009
    #15
  16. Pioneer42

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Edward T wrote:
    (abuse snipped)

    Hi, Keoeeit.

    Like I said, he posts from cpinternet and just keeps changing his name.
    This is to compensate for the fact that he gets ZERO support.
     
    Mark Thomas, Feb 23, 2009
    #16
  17. Pioneer42

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Jason wrote:
    (abuse snipped)

    Hi, Keoeeit.

    Like I said, he posts from cpinternet and just keeps changing his name.
    This is to compensate for the fact that he gets ZERO support.
     
    Mark Thomas, Feb 23, 2009
    #17
  18. Pioneer42

    ASAAR Guest

    Speaking of projection - what happened to yours? Once the king of
    long winded trolls, one that rarely posted less than 300 line
    multi-point replies, you've become effete, only able to eke out a
    weak 4 line response to -hh's mighty 11 point missive. The
    chattering, nattering nabob of negativism is now but an enervated
    sock puppet shell, showing how far the motley have fallen.
     
    ASAAR, Feb 23, 2009
    #18
  19. Pioneer42

    Pioneer42 Guest

    Thanks, I can now use the GIMP with ufraw to open DNG files saved by
    CHDK. I can also now open DNG files with Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo X2,
    but I have to convert them to an uncompressed DNG first.
     
    Pioneer42, Feb 24, 2009
    #19
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.