GIT contains "purge_non_existing_images.sh" in "tools".
Regards,
Markus
Am 17.08.2013 06:06, schrieb Daniel J Blueman:
> After I finish exporting pictures in darktable, I have a script which
> archives the pictures, moving out the raw files, leaving a bunch of
> missing file markers (skull image)
After I finish exporting pictures in darktable, I have a script which
archives the pictures, moving out the raw files, leaving a bunch of
missing file markers (skull image) in Darktable.
Is there a way to prune the image database of removed pictures, eg
'darktable-cli prune' or in the GUI? I guess
Pascal;
So my question remains ... why does dcraw decode the image to a
different size than both the input CR2 and the jpg files? It is then not
possible to compare on a pixel by pixel basis.
David
On 13-08-16 02:39 PM, Pascal Obry wrote:
> dcraw -6 -W -g 1 1 -w
--
not sure those numbers tell me anything. i'll need to zoom in on a gnuplot
graph interactively i guess. do you still have a sample file on the web
somewhere? i could also try to fix 0,0 and 1,1 and see how the result
changes.
-jo
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Pascal Obry wrote:
> Le 16/08/2
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 9:31 AM, David Vincent-Jones
wrote:
> Trying to do my own test and find that my images extracted from the raw
> are not the same size as the camera 'selected size', also not the same
> as the jpg file.
>
> file size set in camera: 3168 x 4752 and the jpg file is true to th
David,
> Maybe I am doing something incorrectly in dcraw. Could somebody repeat
> the dcraw settings that should be used.
Just run basecurve without argument, it tells you the commands and
options to use:
> $ basecurve
> usage: basecurve inputraw.ppm (16-bit) inputjpg.ppm (8-bit) [num_nodes]
Trying to do my own test and find that my images extracted from the raw
are not the same size as the camera 'selected size', also not the same
as the jpg file.
file size set in camera: 3168 x 4752 and the jpg file is true to this size.
Extracted dcraw file: 3177 x 4770
Maybe I am doing somethi
Le 16/08/2013 18:14, johannes hanika a écrit :
> i also remember him mentioning that for some shots a darktable linear
> output performed better? maybe that's one of those?
Don't know. Doing more testing I found also another issue. In very dark
pictures the back are not well displayed.
It may be
i also remember him mentioning that for some shots a darktable linear
output performed better? maybe that's one of those?
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Pascal Obry wrote:
>
> But I see that Torsten has the -W option into the get_basecurve.py,
> maybe it was not used on his side? Or all this
But I see that Torsten has the -W option into the get_basecurve.py,
maybe it was not used on his side? Or all this is red-hearing and there
is something else!
Pascal.
--
Pascal Obry / Magny Les Hameaux (78)
The best way to travel is by means of imagination
http://v2p.fr.eu.org
http:/
Johannes,
> your test shot is a bit underexposed indeed.
>
> i can see two differences. i'm not fixing (0,0) and (1,1), i could do that.
>
> but even the values in between are different, did you use the same
> picture for profiling?
Yes, exactly the same pictures I sent to Torsten.
I just did
your test shot is a bit underexposed indeed.
i can see two differences. i'm not fixing (0,0) and (1,1), i could do that.
but even the values in between are different, did you use the same picture
for profiling?
also i'm fitting the curve to the green channel, maybe the average would be
better in
that should result in exactly the same data. do you have a plot of both
curves somewhere? or at least the pdf produced by my script? maybe the
fitting procedure went wrong. that's the only difference, my script also
fits an 8-point spline (call `./basucurve raw.ppm jpg.ppm 20' to use 20
control poi
Hi Johannes,
A generic question about this. Testing with the same image I sent to
Torsten I get different result with your C version. Are you using the
same algorithm?
What I've experienced is a quite visible increase in lightness with the
C version. Is that expected?
And I find the result sent
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Togan Muftuoglu <
tog...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Hi Johannes,
>
> > johannes hanika writes:
>
> >>
> >> > which you can use to extract a basecurve from a raw + jpg pair. it
> takes
> >> > a lot less memory than the python script and will create an
Hi Johannes,
> johannes hanika writes:
>>
>> > which you can use to extract a basecurve from a raw + jpg pair. it takes
>> > a lot less memory than the python script and will create an optimized
>> > fit to only 8 control points (you can increase it from the cmdline if
>> > necessa
16 matches
Mail list logo
