What I see: 1 - The exposure level is not the same on both the pictures - there is about 1 EV difference 2 - The silkypix.jpg is noise processed while the darktable.jpg is not.
Regards Jean-Luc 2016-10-24 16:14 GMT+02:00 Zbigniew <zbigniew2...@gmail.com>: > J-L.C.> Is there something wrong as I don't SEE anything wrong > > P.O.> Same here. I don't see anything wrong. > > Encouraged by your answers just installed current version of Darktable - > and > what I can say, is... guys, I honestly can't believe you didn't see this: > > https://www.sendspace.com/file/uem3t6 > > Compare, please, the Darktable's output to the one yielded by Silkypix DS > 4: > > https://www.sendspace.com/file/yr51s0 > > You don't see the difference? > > If now you do - that's what I was asking about. It's not just "a bit of > chromatic noise which can be removed using the noise profile module" - it's > exactly a problem described by those guys in linked "reddit" threads. > Whether > Silkypix is removing this by its better decoding routines - or with some > denoising tool - I don't know; anyway this is how it should look like > without > applying denoising. Black should remain black - if not 100% black, then as > shade of grey, but surely without magenta "sand" on it. > > So it seems Darktable has the same flaw in its Canon-RAW processing module, > as most other software. > -- > regards, > Zbigniew > ___________________________________________________________________________ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
