the rt image didn't reduce noise, it just jpeg compressed it heavily. i
really don't think the blocky artifacts near edges are a good trade off.
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Torsten Bronger <
bron...@physik.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
> Hallöchen!
>
> johannes hanika writes:
>
> > my picture look
Hallöchen!
johannes hanika writes:
> my picture looked better.
But not as far as noise is concerned in my opinion. Your contrast
is better, though.
Tschö,
Torsten.
--
Torsten BrongerJabber ID: torsten.bron...@jabber.rwth-aachen.de
or http://bronger-jmp.a
my picture looked better.
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Björn Sonnenschein wrote:
> I have played around with the Image in RawTherapee, seems that they have
> got an effective denoiser!
>
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6808928/rt.jpg
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 13.06.2013, 08:19 +0300 schri
I have played around with the Image in RawTherapee, seems that they have
got an effective denoiser!
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6808928/rt.jpg
Am Donnerstag, den 13.06.2013, 08:19 +0300 schrieb ary brami:
> Hello Matthias,
>
> I'm agree with you, about the noise reduction, unfortunatell
On 13 June 2013 21:53, Torsten Bronger wrote:
> I installed Lr one month ago. At first, I was shocked how few
> features it has -- I thought I had missed an "expert mode" or
> something like that. :-) But its UI seems to be more efficient than
> DT's. These few sliders seem to cover almost ever
Hallöchen!
jeremy rosen writes:
> There is an important (but unavoidable) bias in the methodology
> too...
>
> in your test you processed the image under lightroom then try to
> reproduce the same result with DT
>
> this has sevral unfavorable consequences for DT (the same problem
> would be reve
ogers Wireless Network
-Original Message-
From: ary brami
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:49:02
To: jeremy rosen
Cc:
darktable-users@lists.sourceforge.net;
Matthias Bodenbinder
Subject: Re: [Darktable-users] lightroom vs Darktable on my
Just one question to users which tried to load the embedded history
stack on git master: Did it work? 1.2.1 did not apply the blend modes to
the two instances of profiled denoise. Is this a bug or just a
incompatibility between master and 1.2.1?
Regards,
Markus
Am 11.06.2013 11:41, schrieb johann
Hello Jeremy,
You perfectly right, that in the begenning, that was the idea of the
test. Is it possible to arrive the same result with DT than with LR.
Was also thinking (I don't know LR at all) that it was possible to
reproduce the same developement in the two soft.
Finaly I understand that the t
There is an important (but unavoidable) bias in the methodology too...
in your test you processed the image under lightroom then try to reproduce
the same result with DT
this has sevral unfavorable consequences for DT (the same problem would be
reverted if you went the other way round, which is w
Hello Matthias,
I'm agree with you, about the noise reduction, unfortunatelly. I was
sure before that test, that DT was closer than that...
I think that it's also due to the ISO level. Particularly on this image
where ISO 6400, DT don't achieve the job as good as LR. But on ISO level
lwer, DT is
In LR with each module you have more sliders, so you can't directly compare
them. For instance, in the "Basic" module you have everything from exposure
to white balance to contrast to clarity (local contrast), but each slider
offers less control than DT. They do work very well (for instance, I've
a
Am 12.06.2013 09:16, schrieb Pascal Obry:
> Le 12/06/2013 07:58, Matthias Bodenbinder a écrit :
>> that is interesting. And I am actually shocked about the big
>> difference between Lightroom and Darktable. I find two aspects very
>> odd.
>
> Well the proposal from the same image done by Johannes
Also..
I've been using Lighroom since years. After switching to dt I have
checked the denoise feature as this is somewhat quite important in
digital photography development.
I think that dt quality is between lr 3.x and lr 4.x. Not so bad as when
lr 3.x came out everybody was fond of saying that
Le 12/06/2013 07:58, Matthias Bodenbinder a écrit :
> that is interesting. And I am actually shocked about the big
> difference between Lightroom and Darktable. I find two aspects very
> odd.
Well the proposal from the same image done by Johannes and I are very
close to the Lr one. So I'm no shock
Am 11.06.2013 10:31, schrieb ary brami:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I just publish on my blog a post about developement of the same image, with
> lightroom and darktable.
> The picture was VERY noisy (ISO 6400, at night), and on that point, I must
> admit that I didn't achived to reduce the noise in Dar
Johannes,
> the jpg contains xmp info, you should be able to click on `load sidecar
> file' in lighttable and point it to the jpg :)
Indeed, thanks.
Pascal.
--
Pascal Obry / Magny Les Hameaux (78)
The best way to travel is by means of imagination
http://v2p.fr.eu.org
http://www.obry.
the jpg contains xmp info, you should be able to click on `load sidecar
file' in lighttable and point it to the jpg :)
(let me know if it doesn't work, i'll send you the xmp too)
-jo
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Pascal Obry wrote:
> Hi Jjohannes,
>
> > my take:
> >
> > http://picpaste.co
Hi pascal,
thanks a lot, but I have a problem with your file, Darktable write me
"version non coherente du module colozone 2!=3" and the result is
totally blur without any details...
You know what is the problem ?
Ary
Le mardi 11 juin 2013 à 12:00 +0200, Pascal Obry a écrit :
> Hi Jjohannes,
>
Hi Jjohannes,
> my take:
>
> http://picpaste.com/IMG_9876_01-r8xewKUy.jpg
I've just sent a .xmp to Ary but your version is better than mine!
Would you share your .xmp?
I'm eager to see how you did kill the "pinky" spot in the sky.
Pascal.
--
Pascal Obry / Magny Les Hameaux (78)
The best w
Great, thanks a lot !
I add this on the post, do you have a link to a web site / blog / photo
gallery that you want to add ?
I usually don't shot at this ISO, but this time I was unable to do
someting else...
Ary
Le mardi 11 juin 2013 à 11:41 +0200, johannes hanika a écrit :
> my take:
>
>
>
my take:
http://picpaste.com/IMG_9876_01-r8xewKUy.jpg
man, get a new camera (or shoot at lower iso).
cheers,
jo
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:31 AM, ary brami wrote:
> **
> Hi everybody,
>
> I just publish on my blog a post about developement of the same image,
> with lightroom and darktable.
Hi everybody,
I just publish on my blog a post about developement of the same image,
with lightroom and darktable.
The picture was VERY noisy (ISO 6400, at night), and on that point, I
must admit that I didn't achived to reduce the noise in Darktable as
well as in Lightroom.
If somebody want to tr
23 matches
Mail list logo
