heya,
good stuff, irc is a good idea. in the meantime, have a look at
https://github.com/darktable-org/darktable/blob/master/src/iop/useless_simple.c(or
just useless.c if you prefer) to get you started in the framework. the
guts go into process() and opencl can be done later.
happy to support you
Sure, I'm not pointing the finger at profiled denoise specifically as my
comments apply equally to any of the other tools, and I agree the profiled
denoise is a real good starting point for processing images in general.
I merely draw the observation that when shadows are boosted it seems as if t
hey,
profiled denoise is purely driven by numbers.. the input is measured noise
variances and the output is adjusted to minimise some mean square error if
you don't do any other processing. it does that by minimising the risk of
destroying data that was actually present in the input, while trying
Thanks Jo, I wonder if I have misunderstood.
Say I take an image at 800 ISO and profiled denoise handles it just fine, but
then I come along and hit it with shadows and highlights or otherwise boost
shadows by two stops to pull out detail. My eyes now tell me that I can see
noise in those lig
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Rob Z. Smith wrote:
> Have you tried the profiled denoise with either a simple reduction in
> strength or applied with a brightness ramp through the parametric stuff
> Halgeir?I have one of the older Pentax cameras that (unlike the current
> range) has a fai
2013/12/16 Halgeir Kjønås Rennehvammen :
> Blending is a bit like black magic for me. Why not write a good blog
> article about how blending works.
There is some video around. don't have links here...
--
Pascal Obry / Magny Les Hameaux (78)
The best way to travel is by means of imagination
On 16/12/13 3:45 pm, Halgeir Kjønås Rennehvammen wrote:
> Blending is a bit like black magic for me. Why not write a good blog
> article about how blending works.
Blending is the very same that Photoshop or Gimp use, when you blend one
layer with another. You can choose the mode, the opacity (uni
It was a long time back I ran into this issue and remember trying to
solve it for weeks on those particular shots
I gave up and got back to Rawtherapee. Have been following both user and
dev forum for some
time and have seen this issue on the forums several times. Have also
tried all the suggest
In Mac DT 1.4rc, in DR mode, the little dropdown in the bottom right
corner of the mini view on the top left does not work. I.e., I e.g.
choose, '100%', but nothing happens. The image stays at the current zoom
level.
When I choose '200%', I always get this crash:
Thread 7 Crashed:
0 libdenoisep
Dear developers,
I've extracted some (should be all available) wb-presets from a Sony
DSLR-A580 camera RAW files and I think, it would be nice to make it
available for other users...
By the way, I found that, the displayed temperature values seem to be
wrong calculated (at least in my case). F
Hi,
- You can try this : (can found this information on darktable google+
group, darktable-users group list & darktable-devel group list)
suggested way of using profiled denoise is to use non-local
means with the lightness blend mode
and then create another instance of profiled denoise wi
On 16/12/13 12:40, Halgeir Kjønås Rennehvammen wrote:
> Denoise (profile) removes to much details for my taste so I have to use
> denoise (non local means) and the equalizer
> to get best results.
Try this, using two instances of denoise (profiled):
denoise (profiled), mode: wavelets, strength:
Hi all,
I wrote a year and a half ago or so to a couple of devs, thinking I'd
build a plugin for motion deblurring directly into DT... However the PhD
student assigned to supervising my master's thesis thought I'd be better
off writing it in Matlab. I'm not sure Matlab was the best tool for the
Have you tried the profiled denoise with either a simple reduction in strength
or applied with a brightness ramp through the parametric stuff Halgeir?I
have one of the older Pentax cameras that (unlike the current range) has a
fair bit of noise at high ISO and like you find the profiled den
Open for discussion and possible inclusion in 1.4:
* #400 - increase offset range for watermark placement
not a real bug but quite safe a good candidate
* #399 - fix spots removal presets
to be reviewed carefully
looks more like a hack to me and a temporary solution as the masks
are curre
On 16/12/13 1:40 pm, Halgeir Kjønås Rennehvammen wrote:
> Denoise (profile) removes to much details for my taste so I have to use
> denoise (non local means) and the equalizer
> to get best results.
Why not use the blend to reduce the effect of Denoise (profiled)?
.mm
P.S.: it is a big differenc
Denoise (profile) removes to much details for my taste so I have to use
denoise (non local means) and the equalizer
to get best results.
To follow up the case further. The problem is on raw images from noisy
cameras like Canon 7D on high iso levels.
Give me a couple of days and I will dig in my
On 15/12/13 10:30 pm, Halgeir Kjønås Rennehvammen wrote:
> I really have to disagree. Very sorry! This have been a recurring
> problem with Dt. :)
Can you post a RAW that exhibits the problems you're describing and
can't be 'fixed' using DT's toolset, in your opinion?
.mm
-
When editing Olympus E-M1 RAW files in dt 1.4rc, the white balance
presets are missing. They are present for the E-M5, but perhaps need to
be replicated for the E-M1.
Steve
--
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they af
'Hot pixels' is exactly an 'impulse noise reduction' filter, you can lower
the threshold if it doesn't fit your needs. Apart from that, you only have
to use the 'Denoise profiled' (which as something like 2 useful sliders,
and often works out of the box), so I don't quite see why the situation is
s
20 matches
Mail list logo
