Re: [Gimp-user] ufraw -- exposure vs base curve
On 03/14/18 12:51, Rick Strong wrote: If you are talking about photographs, altering the curve is not the same as boosting the exposure. Generally speaking, boosting the exposure makes the whole picture brighter, while playing with the curve alters areas--shadows, mid-range, highlights--of the photograph. But, you may play around with one to end up with a result very similar to the other. This is best done in raw. I understand altering different parts of the curve affects different aspects of the image, e.g. highlights vs midtones vs shadows. What I'm asking is if modifications to exposure and the base curve are applied to the same thing at the same place in the pipeline. For example, I am looking at an image where with 0 exposure and the default linear (45 deg lower left to upper right) base curve, the rightmost 3/8 of the histogram is empty. It takes an increase in exposure of about 1.33 to bring the curve to the far right. I can get what appears to be the same effect by grabbing the upper right anchor of the line and dragging it left until it is about 3/8 of the way from the vertical left axis, essentially just making the slope of the line a lot steeper and leaving the origin at the lower left. Are those equivalent operations, or are they doing something subtly different in terms of what processing is done to the image? They appear to be equivalent. But that may not be the case. For example, does boosting the exposure affect noise or bayer decoding artifacts more than adjusting the curve? Alterations to the base curve in ufraw are applied at one point in the pipeline and alterations to the secondary curve (under "Correct luminosity, saturation") tab are applied at a different point. Changes to the secondary curve affect the image in a different manner than the exposure and the base curve. Thanks, Gary Not sure where to ask this as I couldn't find a ufraw forum, but I figured a number of users here might be able to answer. Please redirect me if this is inappropriate. Can anyone explain to me the difference between manipulating the base curve in ufraw and boosting the exposure? I'm wondering in terms of where in the processing pipeline the change takes place. i.e. If I could manipulate the base curve to make the image look exactly the same (to my eye, I know it's not perfect) as boosting the exposure, is there fundamentally a difference in the result? ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Mailing list issue
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 2:48 AM, Andrew < andrew.alangdondavies...@smtp.gnome.org> wrote: > On 13/03/18 07:16, Ben Oliver wrote: > >> Every now and then I get a burst of mail from this list all at once, some >> of which can be 3-5 days old. I don't think they are duplicates. >> >> Does anyone else have this issue? >> > > Happens to me too. Pretty sure they're not duplicates. > > I made their web site install by just typing "make", basically. So now I wonder if it is a clog in the approval filter which is perhaps on someones phone *or* someone needs to type make somewhere carol ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Mailing list issue
On 13/03/18 07:16, Ben Oliver wrote: Every now and then I get a burst of mail from this list all at once, some of which can be 3-5 days old. I don't think they are duplicates. Does anyone else have this issue? Happens to me too. Pretty sure they're not duplicates. ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] Two animation-related plug-ins
Dear all, I would like to share two GIMP plug-ins that I've written. Perhaps someone else here will find them useful. Both are related to making frame-by-frame hand-drawn animations in GIMP. https://github.com/avian2/gimp-plugin-onion-layers "Onion Layers" plug-in adds some shortcuts to switch between layers in a way that is useful when each layer represents a frame of an animation. With a keyboard shortcut you can quickly move one frame forward or backward, and show the next/previous frame with reduced opacity. https://github.com/avian2/gimp-plugin-ac-import This plug-in allows import of a complete animation project from the "Animation Creator" iPad app into GIMP. Since I don't have a computer-connected display tablet, I find it easier to quickly sketch something on the iPad and then later clean it up in GIMP. Best regards Tomaž signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] ufraw -- exposure vs base curve
Hi Gary, If you are talking about photographs, altering the curve is not the same as boosting the exposure. Generally speaking, boosting the exposure makes the whole picture brighter, while playing with the curve alters areas--shadows, mid-range, highlights--of the photograph. But, you may play around with one to end up with a result very similar to the other. This is best done in raw. Rick S. -Original Message- From: Gary Aitken Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 1:45 AM To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org Subject: [Gimp-user] ufraw -- exposure vs base curve Hi Folks, Not sure where to ask this as I couldn't find a ufraw forum, but I figured a number of users here might be able to answer. Please redirect me if this is inappropriate. Can anyone explain to me the difference between manipulating the base curve in ufraw and boosting the exposure? I'm wondering in terms of where in the processing pipeline the change takes place. i.e. If I could manipulate the base curve to make the image look exactly the same (to my eye, I know it's not perfect) as boosting the exposure, is there fundamentally a difference in the result? Thanks, Gary ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list