Thanks,
darktable-1.5.1413236775.0e96e9a
is much more responsive
on my i7/32gb ram
--
(paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri
http://en.opensuse.orgopenSUSE Community Memberfacebook/ptilopteri
http://wahoo.no-ip.orgPhoto Album: http://wahoo
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Michael Below wrote:
> Just a quick thought: IMHO Lightroom does the right thing with different
> process versions. So e.g. images up to darktable 1.6 could use the old
> exposure automatic, images from 2.0 on could use the new one, unless the
> user decides to us
>
> I don't think any darktable doco has been written for it.
Actually, no.
All documentation has been written already.
Take a look at those lines, that got commented-out () in this
commit:
https://github.com/darktable-org/darktable/commit/3b94cde970c11aa6357d2bd3ac9c5cf35ecfd646?diff=split
You s
Just a quick thought: IMHO Lightroom does the right thing with different
process versions. So e.g. images up to darktable 1.6 could use the old exposure
automatic, images from 2.0 on could use the new one, unless the user decides to
use the 1.6 process because he likes those results better. This
On 13/10/14 16:07, Gonçalo Marrafa wrote:
> I just upgraded DT (using Pascal's PPA) and the 'automatic' mode in the
> exposure module has disappeared! Is this
> intended? If so why?
It wasn't judged stable enough to release with 1.6. So it was disabled.
> Btw, if not intended, where can i find
Hi.
This is the commit message that "removed" this feature:
It is not fully ready.
> The exact problem: calculated exposure compensation for same params
> (target level and percentile) differs between my deflicker implementation
> and "reference implementation" (ML deflick.mo)
> Fix *will* alter
Hi.
I just upgraded DT (using Pascal's PPA) and the 'automatic' mode in the
exposure module has disappeared! Is this intended? If so why?
Btw, if not intended, where can i find some documentation on it? I've been
using it and don't really understand how it works. It's kind of a hit or
miss experi
