committed now. numbers were really a little different.
thx,
jo
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Daniel Schury wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Not sure if my last mail got through: I redid the profiling and now the
> benchmark returns reasonable results:
> 100.pfm
well, plots look fine, i'll add to git master and see if anyone complains
(i think the profile is fine, just the benchmark isn't).
thanks for profiling!
-jo
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 7:10 AM, johannes hanika wrote:
> hm. something sounds fishy with those numbers.maybe the reference isn't
> whiteb
hm. something sounds fishy with those numbers.maybe the reference isn't
whitebalanced or something similar. iso 100 should really be ~ 30 PSNR in
that case, denoised or not. probably the profile is fine though :)
-jo
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Daniel Schury wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
4 pictures ISO 100 and one witch each ISO 200 - 1600. Create a HDRI with
3 ISO 100 pictures, safe as reference.pfm. Export one picture with ISO
100 - 1600 each, unprocessed as iso($iso).pfm. Repeat with the formerly
created presets, save as iso($iso)_d
hm, the curves look okay (variance fails to stabilize for very dark regions
a little, but usually that doesn't matter as much). how did you create the
PSNR numbers?
j.
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:59 AM, Daniel Schury wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> attached my
