[darktable-dev] Request for tethering enhancements
Hi. I just upgraded to v2.6 and love the enhancements I've discovered so far! One enhancement I would love is if the tethering feature provided the ability to zoom (to double-check eye-focus) and change orientation for vertical shooting. Ideally, it would be amazing if a saved style could be applied to the images upon capture. That way a general look could be applied to the first image and then added to each successive photo automatically in the shoot. --Bryan Leaman ___ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
Re: [darktable-dev] Re: plan for 2.6.1 - bug fixes - translation
Hello Ragnar, > These are the strings: > > "use single-click in the collect panel" > "expand the module when it is activated, and collapse it when disabled" > "waiting time between each picture in slideshow" > "always show panels' scrollbar" You can ignore them. They are in master but not in 2.6. > Another issue is this sentence, could someone please explain what it > means? I understand each English word, but the context is hard to grasp, > in particular the first sentence. > > "scattering of the neighbourhood to search patches in. > increase for better coarse-grain noise reduction. > does not affect execution time." This is to control the way neighborhood are "expanded" around the central point. We do not get the next neighborhood but some extended one scattered from the central point. Hope this helps! -- Pascal Obry / Magny Les Hameaux (78) The best way to travel is by means of imagination http://www.obry.net gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv-key F949BD3B ___ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
[darktable-dev] Re: plan for 2.6.1 - bug fixes - translation
Good evening, I have translated all new strings to Norwegian bokmål in preparation for 2.6.1 as requested by Pascal. However, please help me with two issues. On building and checking the translation, I see that in the GUI preferences dialog there are some strings still in English. I cannot find these in the newly created pot file, should they not be there? These are the strings: "use single-click in the collect panel" "expand the module when it is activated, and collapse it when disabled" "waiting time between each picture in slideshow" "always show panels' scrollbar" Another issue is this sentence, could someone please explain what it means? I understand each English word, but the context is hard to grasp, in particular the first sentence. "scattering of the neighbourhood to search patches in. increase for better coarse-grain noise reduction. does not affect execution time." Many thanks. -- Ragnar Wisløff Den 04.02.2019 17:42, skrev Pascal Obry: > > Hello! > > I'd like to have 2.6.1 out in March. > > If you have planned a fix (only fixes) to go in it is still time. The > integration window will be close on 15th of February. > > Let me know. > > Maintainers, I think it would be nice to have a 2.6.1 translated if > possible. So if you can prepare a patch against master branch for the > translation you do maintain it would be nice. > > Thanks, > > Note: I'm sending this message to all maintainers (Cci) as asked by > some of them. > ___ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
Re: [darktable-dev] Lens correction with FF lenses used on APS-C
dxomark.com website seems to have relevant numbers, see for example Nikon lens mentioned by Sturm Flut: https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-Nikkor-24-70mm-f-2.8G-ED-mounted-on-Nikon-D750__975 https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-Nikkor-24-70mm-f-2.8G-ED-mounted-on-Nikon-D7100__865 Interestingly enough on D810 number is higher than on D750 even though sensor's physical dimensions are the same, probably due to the absence of optical low-pass filter: https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-Nikkor-24-70mm-f-2.8G-ED-mounted-on-Nikon-D810__963 On Sun, 24 Feb 2019 13:32:54 +0100 Florian W wrote: > Thanks for the details Simon. > > I also thought about it a bit and had a reasoning similar to yours, that > basically something designed for a specific acquisition chain will probably > perform worse on an acquisition chain farther from its spec. > > However thinking about it more deeply, 2 things are still boggling my mind. > > 1 This reasoning is mixing description of digital features with analog ones > . A lens quality and specs is not defined by MP resolution (rather by like > purity of the glass, glass curvature homogeneity, CoC, TCA, and so on). > > 2 Some of the lenses we're talking about were developed and (partially) > targeted to FF cameras having a sensor with less MP than a current APS-C > (for example in Canon, the 6D is a 2012 FF with 20MP). > > If the reasoning is valid, a lens released at times of FF with 24MP or > higher wouldn't be a good match to the previous cameras with less MP. Which > doesn't seems to be the case. > > What I mean by this is that at some point, to ensure a lens will perform > well on FF cameras that will be released the following decade, one can > assume that the optical manufacturing quality is probably one order of > magnitude above the quality required to fit the current camera sensor > capabilities. Maybe explaining why you can see problems in older lenses. > > Please feel free to point any mistake in this reasoning. > > Maybe are we lucky enough that someone working in the optical lenses or > cameras industry is part of this mailing list and provide us some insights > about it :) > > Florian Wernert > Software engineer INSA > In-training Neuroscience researcher > https://www.linkedin.com/in/wernertflorian > > > > Le sam. 23 févr. 2019 à 18:12, Sturm Flut a > écrit : > > > Hi, > > > > Am 23.02.19 um 16:34 schrieb Florian W: > > > Thanks for your answers guys. > > > > > > Simon, I'm curious to know why to you it's not the best idea ? > > > > (oversimplifying it a bit) > > > > Full-frame lenses are designed to deliver their full sharpness across > > the whole full-frame image circle. If I put a full-frame lens on my > > APS-C D7100, I am basically expecting it to deliver 24 megapixels within > > the smaller APS-C image circle the sensor is cropping out. That means I > > expect the lens to deliver about 24*2,25 = 54 megapixels over the whole > > full-frame image circle. Which not that many standard lenses will do. > > > > If put my standard 24-70/2.8 on a Nikon D850 and (let's say) it only > > delivers 40 megapixels of actual resolution instead of the ~46 the > > sensor wants, that's not going to be a catastrophe. If I put it on a > > camera with a lower resolution sensor, e.g. the 24 megapixel sensor in > > the D750, there is zero problem. But if I put the same lens on the > > D7100, the cropped area will only get around 40 / 2,25 = 17 megapixels. > > That's suddenly 30% less than what the sensor needs. And not every lens > > will even deliver these 40 megapixels. Good APS-C and especially > > Micro-Four-Thirds lenses are expensive and hard to make because they > > have to be very sharp within the smaller image circle. > > > > Prime lenses are usually sharper to begin with, so with your 50/1.8 and > > 28/2.8 it might not be that much of an issue. But I can clearly see the > > problem with my 24-70/2.8, and especially with the good old 70-300/4.5-5.6. > > > > cheers, > > Simon > > > > ___ > darktable developer mailing list > to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org > ___ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
Re: [darktable-dev] Lens correction with FF lenses used on APS-C
Thanks for the details Simon. I also thought about it a bit and had a reasoning similar to yours, that basically something designed for a specific acquisition chain will probably perform worse on an acquisition chain farther from its spec. However thinking about it more deeply, 2 things are still boggling my mind. 1 This reasoning is mixing description of digital features with analog ones . A lens quality and specs is not defined by MP resolution (rather by like purity of the glass, glass curvature homogeneity, CoC, TCA, and so on). 2 Some of the lenses we're talking about were developed and (partially) targeted to FF cameras having a sensor with less MP than a current APS-C (for example in Canon, the 6D is a 2012 FF with 20MP). If the reasoning is valid, a lens released at times of FF with 24MP or higher wouldn't be a good match to the previous cameras with less MP. Which doesn't seems to be the case. What I mean by this is that at some point, to ensure a lens will perform well on FF cameras that will be released the following decade, one can assume that the optical manufacturing quality is probably one order of magnitude above the quality required to fit the current camera sensor capabilities. Maybe explaining why you can see problems in older lenses. Please feel free to point any mistake in this reasoning. Maybe are we lucky enough that someone working in the optical lenses or cameras industry is part of this mailing list and provide us some insights about it :) Florian Wernert Software engineer INSA In-training Neuroscience researcher https://www.linkedin.com/in/wernertflorian Le sam. 23 févr. 2019 à 18:12, Sturm Flut a écrit : > Hi, > > Am 23.02.19 um 16:34 schrieb Florian W: > > Thanks for your answers guys. > > > > Simon, I'm curious to know why to you it's not the best idea ? > > (oversimplifying it a bit) > > Full-frame lenses are designed to deliver their full sharpness across > the whole full-frame image circle. If I put a full-frame lens on my > APS-C D7100, I am basically expecting it to deliver 24 megapixels within > the smaller APS-C image circle the sensor is cropping out. That means I > expect the lens to deliver about 24*2,25 = 54 megapixels over the whole > full-frame image circle. Which not that many standard lenses will do. > > If put my standard 24-70/2.8 on a Nikon D850 and (let's say) it only > delivers 40 megapixels of actual resolution instead of the ~46 the > sensor wants, that's not going to be a catastrophe. If I put it on a > camera with a lower resolution sensor, e.g. the 24 megapixel sensor in > the D750, there is zero problem. But if I put the same lens on the > D7100, the cropped area will only get around 40 / 2,25 = 17 megapixels. > That's suddenly 30% less than what the sensor needs. And not every lens > will even deliver these 40 megapixels. Good APS-C and especially > Micro-Four-Thirds lenses are expensive and hard to make because they > have to be very sharp within the smaller image circle. > > Prime lenses are usually sharper to begin with, so with your 50/1.8 and > 28/2.8 it might not be that much of an issue. But I can clearly see the > problem with my 24-70/2.8, and especially with the good old 70-300/4.5-5.6. > > cheers, > Simon > ___ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
[darktable-dev] Grey theme
Hi, I've posted this on the users' list a week ago, but have not received any reply. Could you please provide a recommendation for general-purpose processing? I mainy post online (on Smugmug, which uses dark backgound, but the primary surface are our family blog and Facebook, which are both on light background). I mostly edit at night, in a quite dark room, with a 'warm-white' LED desk lap illuminating the white wall behind the monitor. Thanks in advance, Kofa -- Forwarded message - From: KOVÁCS István Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2019 22:38 Subject: Grey theme To: Darktable Users List Hi, A question has come up on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/groups/darktable/permalink/1200810193417890/) about theming. I answered with a link from the announcement of 2.6.0 (https://www.darktable.org/2018/12/darktable-26/), which provides the CSS for a white and a grey theme, adding the following: "[regarding the white theme] Note that with such setup, images will look darker, hence the aspect of the GUI may push the user to over-expose the images. A white background is interesting for people working on images meant to be displayed on white background, though. To avoid being influenced towards over- or under-exposing pictures, a grey theme like the following is much more advisable" - and then the article provides a grey theme. So, returning to the question: if this a recommendation for print-oriented people (whom a white theme may push to overexpose images)? The text mentions underexposure, too, which I'd link to a very dark UI. If it's for everyone, and it is "much more advisable" (than the default black or a custom white theme), why is it not the default with 2.6? Thanks in advance, Kofa ___ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
